Jump to content
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

DK Metcalf - WR - Seattle Seahawks - #LetRussCook fan club president


ty247

Recommended Posts

14 minutes ago, Ilov80s said:

Interesting. What don't you like about Harry?

I think his lack of quickness is a major issue. He had trouble getting separation in college, now he'll be facing universally better athletes in the NFL. I also think his run after catch is pretty overrated, he's merely decent after the catch, he's not some Brandon Marshall like tackle breaker. I typically favor guys who create separation, because I think it translates better than outphysicaling guys. I think he's got a high bust chance, if he doesn't end up in a great situation. 

He's my WR7(and more likely to move down than up) behind Metcalf, Arcega-Whiteside(a better version of Harry to me) Isabella, Brown's(both AJ and Marquise) and Samuel. 

I think Harry is a guy I wouldn't touch until round 2 of a fantasy draft unless he goes to a team with a top QB, desperate for a guy to force targets too. I think the hope with Harry is that he can be a bigger Michael Crabtree. The comparisons to guys like Michael Thomas or DeAndre Hopkins feel crazy to me. There was some debate in the Harry thread, between Harry vs Sutton and I would prefer Sutton myself.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, travdogg said:

I think his lack of quickness is a major issue. He had trouble getting separation in college, now he'll be facing universally better athletes in the NFL. I also think his run after catch is pretty overrated, he's merely decent after the catch, he's not some Brandon Marshall like tackle breaker. I typically favor guys who create separation, because I think it translates better than outphysicaling guys. I think he's got a high bust chance, if he doesn't end up in a great situation. 

He's my WR7(and more likely to move down than up) behind Metcalf, Arcega-Whiteside(a better version of Harry to me) Isabella, Brown's(both AJ and Marquise) and Samuel. 

I think Harry is a guy I wouldn't touch until round 2 of a fantasy draft unless he goes to a team with a top QB, desperate for a guy to force targets too. I think the hope with Harry is that he can be a bigger Michael Crabtree. The comparisons to guys like Michael Thomas or DeAndre Hopkins feel crazy to me. There was some debate in the Harry thread, between Harry vs Sutton and I would prefer Sutton myself.

 

Wow. I agree he’s not great on separation but I don’t see Harmon or JJ separating much better. I just look at that production and especially age-adjusted production which falls in line with what we see with top 20 fantasy WRs. Then I look at the tape and I see a physically dominant player who can make any catch no matter where the ball is or how tightly he is defended. He’s got great sideline awareness and is tough to bring down. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Ilov80s said:

Wow. I agree he’s not great on separation but I don’t see Harmon or JJ separating much better. I just look at that production and especially age-adjusted production which falls in line with what we see with top 20 fantasy WRs. Then I look at the tape and I see a physically dominant player who can make any catch no matter where the ball is or how tightly he is defended. He’s got great sideline awareness and is tough to bring down. 

I think JJ separates better, and is better at the catch point. JJ is the best guy in the draft at contested catches in my eyes. I'd give you Harry over Harmon, I'm not really high on either of them. 

If I were drafting just by how much I trust a guy, then Isabella would be my #1 WR.

I agree its tough to really pinpoint who is #1, like last year was too. I was a Ridley guy last year, and I have Metcalf #1 this year.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On ‎2‎/‎26‎/‎2019 at 12:22 PM, Dr. Dan said:

I'd want more than a Brandin Cooks with a pick this high

You'd want more than a guy that has averaged 77 catches for 1,150 yards and 7 TDs over his last four seasons (and put up 55-550-3 when he was misued as a rookie)? - good luck with that.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, menobrown said:

6-3 3/8, 228, 9 7/8 hands and huge arms/wingspand at 34 7/8 and 82 7/8.

I need to review the TE's but I think that's longer arms and wingspan then any TE's.  Thought he might weight more but good with 228 for sure.

This is awesome me and can’t wait to see what he runs. He’s going to blow up the combine I think 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Dr. Octopus said:

You'd want more than a guy that has averaged 77 catches for 1,150 yards and 7 TDs over his last four seasons (and put up 55-550-3 when he was misued as a rookie)? - good luck with that.

1.1 I would hope is a WR who would eventually be a WR1. I'm not sure I would be very confident with Cooks as my WR1. FBG has him ranked 14th in dynasty.  Hes a very solid player to have and a huge advantage as your WR2, but I'm hoping for a guy who could be top 10, top 5 even maybe in several years. 

Maybe I'm expecting too much, but a WR 1.1 better be a hell of a WR IMO

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Dr. Dan said:

1.1 I would hope is a WR who would eventually be a WR1. I'm not sure I would be very confident with Cooks as my WR1. FBG has him ranked 14th in dynasty.  Hes a very solid player to have and a huge advantage as your WR2, but I'm hoping for a guy who could be top 10, top 5 even maybe in several years. 

Maybe I'm expecting too much, but a WR 1.1 better be a hell of a WR IMO

There is no sure thing player in this draft - and even "safer" players can fail. Let me put it this way, if someone could give you the choice between

1) guaranteed that the WR you picked at 1.01 would have Brandin Cooks' career to date; or

2) take your chances.

 it would be very risky (i.e. somewhat foolish) to choose option 2. Taking a sure fire top 15 WR at 1.01 seems like a no-brainer to me.

I guess I mostly just feel that once again I need to defend Brandin Cooks who just doesn't get the proper respect in the fantasy community for whatever reason.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Gandalf said:

What destinations would make you want to avoid Metcalf? Bills? Ravens?

Ravens are were WR's go to die and they are incomparably worse then any other spot.

I'd not really mind the Bills so much, not a dream spot but not so bad and I should say not so bad for Metcalf. I'd hate Bills for a guy like Marquise Brown, think Josh Allen's inaccuracy issues would be more in play. But give me someone with Metcalfs size, speed and wingspan with Allen's arm and I'd not really be that down.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, menobrown said:

Ravens are were WR's go to die and they are incomparably worse then any other spot.

I'd not really mind the Bills so much, not a dream spot but not so bad and I should say not so bad for Metcalf. I'd hate Bills for a guy like Marquise Brown, think Josh Allen's inaccuracy issues would be more in play. But give me someone with Metcalfs size, speed and wingspan with Allen's arm and I'd not really be that down.

Yeah every pass play for the Bills would be ‘Metcalf go deep’ with Allen launching a bomb. Plus this would stretch the field and let things open up for Allen to run.

Edited by Gandalf
Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, Gandalf said:

What destinations would make you want to avoid Metcalf? Bills? Ravens?

Yes. Cards and Jets would make a bit nervous. They don't have established QBs and we don't really know what to make of the offensive system yet either. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Andy Dufresne said:

Cards yes, Jets no. I should think Darnold would force feed him plenty.

I’m not in love with anything I’ve seen from Gase as a coach and while I was impressed by Darnold down the stretch, the Corey Davis convo got me thinking. I assumed Marriota was going to be a real good QB and feed Davis.Banking on an unproven coach and QB makes me nervous.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Sir Psycho said:

Ian Rapoport‏Verified account @RapSheet 20s21 seconds ago

More

Ole Miss WR D.K. Metcalf, of social media fame, measured in at 6-foot-3 and 3/8 and 228 pounds... with 1.6% body fat

1.6% body fat is not a healthy or sustainable level

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Gandalf said:

1.6% body fat is not a healthy or sustainable level

Donald Driver was pretty much right on this number during his GB days. I have personal knowledge of this. He was always a little higher but he did get down to about 2% and did just fine. 

It's not unhealthy for someone in top top shape 

Edited by Dr. Dan
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Dr. Dan said:

Donald Driver was pretty much right on this number during his GB peak. I have personal knowledge of this 

I don’t doubt that he thought he was but I would wonder how frequently he was being tested. 3% body fat is not that different from 1.6%. I mean 1.6% and you would start to worry about internal organs.

Edited by Gandalf
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Dr. Octopus said:

There is no sure thing player in this draft - and even "safer" players can fail. Let me put it this way, if someone could give you the choice between

1) guaranteed that the WR you picked at 1.01 would have Brandin Cooks' career to date; or

2) take your chances.

 it would be very risky (i.e. somewhat foolish) to choose option 2. Taking a sure fire top 15 WR at 1.01 seems like a no-brainer to me.

I guess I mostly just feel that once again I need to defend Brandin Cooks who just doesn't get the proper respect in the fantasy community for whatever reason.

Because he's a guy that is steady but doesn't win you games. That's just the way I feel about him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Gandalf said:

I don’t doubt that he thought he was but I would wonder how frequently he was being tested. 3% body fat is not that different from 1.6%. I mean 1.6% and you would start to worry about internal organs.

I have exclusive knowledge of his tests. He was around 2% at one point. much older than Metcalf even

 

I'm not very worried about the body fat. trying to find warts in this case. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He isn't 1.6% body fat:

The top 3 bodybuilders pictured in the link below are at 3-4% body fat at their peak, on competition day, when they have purposefully dehydrated their bodies to the absolute maximum level:

http://truth-dealer.com/physiology/fundamentals/lean-body-weight-03.html

He is more like 4% to 7%. The guy at 4-6% in the link is easily leaner than Metcalf's training pic with AJ Brown. 

Metcalf has an amazing physique, but he is assuredly not on the same level, nor leaner than world-class, steroid & diuretic-using, dehydrated-on-competition-day bodybuilders. 

 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Dr. Dan said:

I have exclusive knowledge of his tests. He was around 2% at one point. much older than Metcalf even

 

I'm not very worried about the body fat. trying to find warts in this case. 

Not trying to find warts or meant to imply I would be worried about this affecting him on a football field. I’m a physician and you don’t see many if any people on the planet at that body fat. But Metcalf might be a different species of human. And apparently Donald driver. Haha.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Leroy's Aces said:

He isn't 1.6% body fat:

The top 3 bodybuilders pictured in the link below are at 3-4% body fat at their peak, on competition day, when they have purposefully dehydrated their bodies to the absolute maximum level:

http://truth-dealer.com/physiology/fundamentals/lean-body-weight-03.html

He is more like 4% to 7%. The guy at 4-6% in the link is easily leaner than Metcalf's training pic with AJ Brown. 

Metcalf has an amazing physique, but he is assuredly not on the same level, nor leaner than world-class, steroid & diuretic-using, dehydrated-on-competition-day bodybuilders. 

 

This ^^^ is consistent with my thoughts too

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, Gandalf said:

Not trying to find warts or meant to imply I would be worried about this affecting him on a football field. I’m a physician and you don’t see many if any people on the planet at that body fat. But Metcalf might be a different species of human. And apparently Donald driver. Haha.

Its low without a doubt. I expected about 3-4% from "the picture"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Dr. Dan said:

Its low without a doubt. I expected about 3-4% from "the picture"

Me too. Or like 4-6%. I think this tells us that Metcalf is willing to put in the time at the gym. 

Edited by Gandalf
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quote

Ole Miss WR D.K. Metcalf recorded 27 reps on the bench press at the NFL Scouting Combine.

Metcalf (6'3/228) lifting more like an offensive lineman or a strong running back (Jalin Moore turned in 27 reps on Thursday) than a wide receiver. He has yet to even test in earnest beyond the bench, but already has turned heads with his physical prowess since arriving in Indianapolis. NFL Network's Ian Rapoport passed along on Thursday that Metcalf has just 1.6-percent body fat. He could threaten the 4.3's in the 40-yard dash when he runs this weekend. Just a physical freak.

SOURCE: Trevor Sikkema on Twitter

Mar 1, 2019, 12:39 PM

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/28/2019 at 6:32 PM, Leroy's Aces said:

He isn't 1.6% body fat:

The top 3 bodybuilders pictured in the link below are at 3-4% body fat at their peak, on competition day, when they have purposefully dehydrated their bodies to the absolute maximum level:

http://truth-dealer.com/physiology/fundamentals/lean-body-weight-03.html

He is more like 4% to 7%. The guy at 4-6% in the link is easily leaner than Metcalf's training pic with AJ Brown. 

Metcalf has an amazing physique, but he is assuredly not on the same level, nor leaner than world-class, steroid & diuretic-using, dehydrated-on-competition-day bodybuilders. 

 

If the pictures are correct then this is one of the more informative and educational bits of information shared regarding body fat.

I have to assume that body builders know more about body fat so going by that information Metcalf isn't anywhere near 1.6% body fat.  I don't know if body builders use a more sophisticated testing of body fat than they use at the Combine but the entire emphasis in that sport is 'cutting' (body fat) before a contest so I would go by their numbers.

Also, the Combine weight and height metrics for Metcalf are perfect IMHO. 

I thought from the earlier workout photo that he was pushing 240 lbs which would have been a bit concerning so seeing him come in at 228 is great.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think I may know what happened. If the NFL is using electronic body fat analyzers and Metcalf drank a bunch of water before the test, it would lower his actual body fat percentage. If he was 3% and drinks 2 liters of water before the test maybe he would be 1.6%.

None of this matters really either. Let’s see what his 40 time is!

Edited by Gandalf
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Gandalf said:

I think I may know what happened. If the NFL is using electronic body fat analyzers and Metcalf drank a bunch of water before the test, it would lower his actual body fat percentage. If he was 3% and drinks 2 liters of water before the test maybe he would be 1.6%.

None of this matters really either. Let’s see what his 40 time is!

Ah, yeah.  Pretty smart.👨‍🎓

Body builders cut to gain definition so they would not want to bloat themselves with water but it makes a ton of sense to 'game the Combine system' that isn't concerned about definition and only look at the bottom line body fat metrics so good take.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
  • Create New...