WRs: Every team but one

[HailHydra]

I think I need to adjust what I said earlier. I don't know about spending a top 10-15 pick on a WR because you're getting this potentially great player that costs a ton of money but doesn't necessarily lead to championships. On the other hand, a late first or second round pick is definitely a good time to take a WR. That's where you get guys like JJ Smith-Schuster.

This is a very flawed mentality. You don't get "guys" like Smith-Schuster in the 2nd round. In the 2nd round, you get WRs who are seen to be inferior to their counterparts in the 1st round. The 2nd round isn't some kind of haven for WRs that turn out for the better - teams just hit on some draft picks. Statistically, you'll have a better chance of hitting on a WR in the 1st round.

Another flawed mentality is that Belichick can't hit on WRs in the 1st or 2nd round (early in general). The issue is that the team is unable to scout the WRs properly - not that these early round WRs are worse than late round guys. Jump back a few years when Malcolm Mitchell was drafted - offer Belichick the opportunity to draft Mitchell, or draft the 1st round guy. He'll choose the 1st round guy. It's not that the 1st/2nd rounds are taboo. Talent is better there, but you just need to properly identify it.

 

[miloofcroton]

This is a very flawed mentality. You don't get "guys" like Smith-Schuster in the 2nd round. In the 2nd round, you get WRs who are seen to be inferior to their counterparts in the 1st round. The 2nd round isn't some kind of haven for WRs that turn out for the better - teams just hit on some draft picks. Statistically, you'll have a better chance of hitting on a WR in the 1st round.

Another flawed mentality is that Belichick can't hit on WRs in the 1st or 2nd round (early in general). The issue is that the team is unable to scout the WRs properly - not that these early round WRs are worse than late round guys. Jump back a few years when Malcolm Mitchell was drafted - offer Belichick the opportunity to draft Mitchell, or draft the 1st round guy. He'll choose the 1st round guy. It's not that the 1st/2nd rounds are taboo. Talent is better there, but you just need to properly identify it.

I only meant JJSS as an illustration of what you can still get there, not a proof.

There *is* some truth to the idea that certain types of talents are going to be available at different times. 6'4" 220 WRs that run 4.3 40s are never going to drop to #32 no matter what. But a tough possession WR with good route running savvy? Some of those guys will drop down to there.

So, JJSS was a demonstration of the type of talent you might still get in the late first/second.

 

[TB_Helmet]

If Super Bowl wins validate team composition wholesale, leaving little room for nuanced disagreements, then it only seems fair that playoff loses serve as equally comprehensive indictments. Blow up everything! The teams are trash! Too reactionary, methinks.

A more judicious approach to a postmortem (with an eye toward using the findings to influence future roster construction) would readily show that WR was sorely neglected in numerous years; notably, 2006 and 2013, although I'm sure the board can come up with additional seasons. Even with Brady directing the show and elevating the offensive talent, the abysmal WR corps proved insurmountable.

Also, 20 years is a strange cut off for the great-wide-receivers-in-the-Super-Bowl debate, since it ignores the dominance of Irvin and Rice, among others, who earned multiple championships each. I'm not sure they were simply fungible components in the passing attack. But sure, maybe the game has changed (or maybe trends are simply observed outcomes, not predictive analysis).

Yeah not sure why 20 years is the cutoff but it shouldn’t go before the salary cap era, where this would be a different discussion (also when Rice and Irvin were in their prime).

 

[WaterfallJumper]

Yeah not sure why 20 years is the cutoff but it shouldn’t go before the salary cap era, where this would be a different discussion (also when Rice and Irvin were in their prime).

Salary cap considerations are fair.

Perhaps I should have left out that paragraph, since the other portion of my post was more important.

 

[Simpelton]

This is a very flawed mentality. You don't get "guys" like Smith-Schuster in the 2nd round. In the 2nd round, you get WRs who are seen to be inferior to their counterparts in the 1st round. The 2nd round isn't some kind of haven for WRs that turn out for the better - teams just hit on some draft picks. Statistically, you'll have a better chance of hitting on a WR in the 1st round.

Another flawed mentality is that Belichick can't hit on WRs in the 1st or 2nd round (early in general). The issue is that the team is unable to scout the WRs properly - not that these early round WRs are worse than late round guys. Jump back a few years when Malcolm Mitchell was drafted - offer Belichick the opportunity to draft Mitchell, or draft the 1st round guy. He'll choose the 1st round guy. It's not that the 1st/2nd rounds are taboo. Talent is better there, but you just need to properly identify it.

Disagree with text in bold. The real issue as I see it is that wide receivers are an overrated commodity, making it hard to find good value in the first or second rounds. In other positions it's much easier to wind up with a standout talent nobody was looking at and thus maximize the value of your draft pick.

It comes down to the main philosophical dilemma of the draft -- do you draft for need or do you draft what you consider to be the best player available? If it's the latter, you won't get many top tier wideouts from draft slot #32 because teams with questionmarks at quarterback reach for those. So you have to fill that part of the roster other ways rather than overpay (IE reach) for wide receiver talent. Either with mid to low round wideouts that give you reason to believe will play well on your team, or with good scouting of UDFAs and opportunistic signings of mid tier pros.

Reasonably confident that BB's mindset is something very close to what I just described. He won't go for the overrated wideout talent in top rounds, he'll see what sinks into the mid rounds after the feeding frenzy of WRs and QBs dies down a little, and instead focus on other team needs

 

[HailHydra]

Disagree with text in bold. The real issue as I see it is that wide receivers are an overrated commodity, making it hard to find good value in the first or second rounds. In other positions it's much easier to wind up with a standout talent nobody was looking at and thus maximize the value of your draft pick.

It comes down to the main philosophical dilemma of the draft -- do you draft for need or do you draft what you consider to be the best player available? If it's the latter, you won't get many top tier wideouts from draft slot #32 because teams with questionmarks at quarterback reach for those. So you have to fill that part of the roster other ways rather than overpay (IE reach) for wide receiver talent. Either with mid to low round wideouts that give you reason to believe will play well on your team, or with good scouting of UDFAs and opportunistic signings of mid tier pros.

Reasonably confident that BB's mindset is something very close to what I just described. He won't go for the overrated wideout talent in top rounds, he'll see what sinks into the mid rounds after the feeding frenzy of WRs and QBs dies down a little, and instead focus on other team needs

I mean our WR core is at the point where we really ought to draft two just for need. Having a 32 year old lead your group isn't ideal. It also isn't ideal to have this be the case when our offensive weapon group is a year or two away from losing it's stars (Gronk, Edelman, and Brady as well)

 

[PatsFan37]

In the case of the 3 cone, there are a couple things to consider.

- It's a skill that you have to practice. When 0.2 seconds out of 7 seconds matters (that's 3% in case you were wondering), small inefficiencies matter.
- For the same reason, it's unreliable. Have you ever checked to see if players reliably run the same 3 cone time before and after the combine? Probably not, and there's probably very little data on it because players just run it once.
- Thirdly, it's actually harder to run the faster you are. If you have the horsepower to run a 4.3 40 and you weigh 225 pounds, that's a ton of momentum ( p = mv ) to change. I can easily see someone err in trying to run too fast, leading them to spend more effort in acceleration and deceleration, instead of coasting and being able to change direction more quickly. Coasting for a 4.3 guy might be just running at a 4.5 pace. So, this reiterates point #1.

I do think there's value in the 3 cone, principally because football does a whole lot more sideways movements than shuttles or 40s, but you have to realize the testing has limitations and weaknesses.

Yes, but it seems this is similar to the skills a WR needs to smoothly get in and out of his breaks, so in that sense may test actual football skills better than the 40 or the bench press. Precise control over your speed to maximize sudden change of direction doesn't sounds like something you learn overnight, but something you have to master for the NFL.

 

[Ian]

If Super Bowl wins validate team composition wholesale, leaving little room for nuanced disagreements, then it only seems fair that playoff loses serve as equally comprehensive indictments. Blow up everything! The teams are trash! Too reactionary, methinks.

A more judicious approach to a postmortem (with an eye toward using the findings to influence future roster construction) would readily show that WR was sorely neglected in numerous years; notably, 2006 and 2013, although I'm sure the board can come up with additional seasons. Even with Brady directing the show and elevating the offensive talent, the abysmal WR corps proved insurmountable.

Also, 20 years is a strange cut off for the great-wide-receivers-in-the-Super-Bowl debate, since it ignores the dominance of Irvin and Rice, among others, who earned multiple championships each. I'm not sure they were simply fungible components in the passing attack. But sure, maybe the game has changed (or maybe trends are simply observed outcomes, not predictive analysis).

Super Bowl wins are great, but they also force you to look back on just how tough it was to get there and how hard it might be to get back there. Every team tries to improve each offseason and every year, there's typically 1-2 AFC teams who at least make things difficult as New England tries to get that all-important top playoff seed. The question then is just whether or not they have enough weapons to match-up against them. Aside from Moss, they've never really had marquee guys per se at the WR position, and no one is saying they have to have that. But it's obvious that they need to start looking a little more toward the future.

I sort of wonder how Edelman will be viewed years down the road once his career is over. Locally, we know how good he is. They've won each Super Bowl he's played in since 2014 and lost the one he missed. Obviously, like past really good players, we look at guys like him as being even better and seem to appreciate them more once they're gone, or at least that's how it feels. I think many know he's a terrific player but don't realize what a true game-changer he's been, or how hard it's going to be to replace him. They got lucky that he became who he is the season right after Wes Welker left. I'm not entirely convinced they'll be that fortunate this time around. But it definitely makes for an interesting discussion.

 

[PatsDeb]

Deb never drives me crazy TBH

Aw, thanks PJ. Right back atcha

 

[Simpelton]

I mean our WR core is at the point where we really ought to draft two just for need. Having a 32 year old lead your group isn't ideal. It also isn't ideal to have this be the case when our offensive weapon group is a year or two away from losing it's stars (Gronk, Edelman, and Brady as well)

I fully agree in principle with the need to get younger, but the draft is not necessarily the only way to do this.

 

[Ring 6]

Pardon? Andy, I never advocated for spending more money on WRs. I just invited people to say their plan would be for the position. Should I gather from what you've said that your plan would be to sit tight with the current roster? If not, what/who?

Perhaps I read more into your post than you meant. I assume saying we are the only team that didn’t do something implies we are wrong to not have.
Of course you don’t sit tight, not you are reading things into my post that I didn’t say.

I advocate lots of competition at all positions and always have. But, with this team and this qb, I believe the plan to find WRs from the bargain route is the right way to go.
That includes the draft, free agency, trades. A shotgun approach like last year should be fine, and last year just about everything that could go wrong did go wrong.

 

[miloofcroton]

Yes, but it seems this is similar to the skills a WR needs to smoothly get in and out of his breaks, so in that sense may test actual football skills better than the 40 or the bench press. Precise control over your speed to maximize sudden change of direction doesn't sounds like something you learn overnight, but something you have to master for the NFL.

If that were true, then the 6th round WR last year Dylan Cantrell, with his 6.56 3-cone at 6'3" 225 pounds, would've been the next great thing. Instead, he didn't even play a snap this year.

Interestingly, read his scouting report: NFL Draft & Combine Profile - Dylan Cantrell | NFL.com

"Lacks route speed and quickness to uncover on intermediate routes as a pro"
"Very little acceleration out of breaks"
"Feet are lethargic off his release"

Watch his combine workout. You can find it from the link above. The scouting report matches the video, as his feet are *incredibly* slow.

Now, how can a large athlete with slow feet run a 6.56 3-cone? According to some, that time would have to imply that he's basically Wes Welker in the body of Terrell Owens, but we can visually confirm that is not the case. So what should that say about our use of the 3-cone as a measurement?

 

[supafly]

I sort of wonder how Edelman will be viewed years down the road once his career is over. Locally, we know how good he is. They've won each Super Bowl he's played in since 2014 and lost the one he missed. Obviously, like past really good players, we look at guys like him as being even better and seem to appreciate them more once they're gone, or at least that's how it feels. I think many know he's a terrific player but don't realize what a true game-changer he's been, or how hard it's going to be to replace him. They got lucky that he became who he is the season right after Wes Welker left. I'm not entirely convinced they'll be that fortunate this time around. But it definitely makes for an interesting discussion.

Boy, it would’ve been nice to have snagged up Adam Humphries. That one is going to sting for awhile. Hoping that they get a nice consolation prize via the draft.

 

[n6249c]

At times it “was barely enough”?

Good lord man, the NFL is all in on parity, making sure that on any given Sunday any team has a competitive chance at winning . In that competitive environment barely enough to win should be the expected norm not a disappointing failure!

Meanwhile the Pats have been making a mockery of parity for almost two decades. It’s a glass half empty or three quarters full question.

I’d suggest you look at it through the lens of expecting barely enough to be the norm and anything more to be a significant triumph. Does that help?

Yes we’re lucky to have Edelman, Gronk and White. But last season showed that times that was barely enough, particularly with a sub-par Gronk on the field. Brady was as bad in the RZ as I’ve seen him in the last decade and that wasn’t because of a big drop off in his play, it was because his targets didn’t seem to be there. I don’t see the harm in drafting some WRs when you have 12 picks even if it’s just to throw stuff at the wall in the hope that something sticks (of course, I hope they’ll be a little more scientific than that).

 

[n6249c]

...

The fact is that WRs are only one part of a single facet of the team, and by far the least versatile component of that facet. BB craves versatility, and he's never likely to sink vast quantities of cap space into niche specialists, however important we perceive them to be. Not unless it's another Moss style no-brainer where the risk to the team is minimal and the reward is enormous.

Flash Gordon is an interesting example in this area. Enormous potential reward, at low financial risk. But risk in other areas seems high to many of us while obviously being within acceptable limits to BB.

 

[n6249c]

I think it's great that more and more posters are willing to separate the winning from the underlying issues (positive or negative) for discussion purposes.

I think it’s specious to ignore winning in any discussion of team construction. After all winning is the goal, removing it from any discussion eliminates the most important measure of success. How can you have a meaningful discussion about the relative merits of different choices when you eliminate the most meaningful way to measure them?

 

[n6249c]

No need to draft WRs and good reason not to. Spend draft capital on other positions where there is better and more immediate return. Let other teams draft WRs, see how they do and grab those who will have more value in our system when they come available on the open market.

Just because we haven't had success drafting WRs in the past doesn't mean we should stop trying.

We need to acknowledge that the main reason we fail at drafting WRs is that they can't pick up the offense, and therefore we should only draft a guy if we think he has a brilliant football mind (perhaps at the expense of athleticisim). Go after a guy where you hear the story that BB watched film with him for an hour when scouting him and came out impressed (I think that was the case with McCourty and a couple others).

I don't think the WRs were a huge weakness last year but we can always get better at the position. One notable thing is that if Edelman goes down then I'd say WR shifts to be a major concern, especially given uncertainty around Gronk's availability.

 

[TB_Helmet]

No need to draft WRs and good reason not to. Spend draft capital on other positions where there is better and more immediate return. Let other teams draft WRs, see how they do and grab those who will have more value in our system when they come available on the open market.

Well, that's what we're doing now, so apparently BB agrees with you.

 

[supafly]

No need to draft WRs and good reason not to. Spend draft capital on other positions where there is better and more immediate return. Let other teams draft WRs, see how they do and grab those who will have more value in our system when they come available on the open market.

That seems to be an approach that they’ve taken lately, but the problem is that it’s going to cost a hell of a lot more to do it that way.

Drafting a WR at our spot in the second round would cost a total of about 6-6.5m for the entire duration of the 4 year contract. Picking someone up in free agency will often cost more than that for just one year.

There are pros and cons to both ways, it seems.

 

[long distance]

Yep, that's actually why I waited until now to start this post. My hope was that once the AB/OBJ silly season was over we could have a discussion about what we should really do at the WR position. And last I checked, nobody in this thread was pounding the table for a $16-million WR, so maybe it worked!

FWIW I've always been in the camp that says that marquee WRs are overvalued. I've even argued that the Falcons made a mistake trading so many picks to move up for Julio Jones. But I also assumed it was obvious that a 33-year-old Julian Edelman and a maybe-retiring Rob Gronkowski can't be the team's entire plan for this season.

OBJ would be just very good business, nothing silly about that really (except maybe himself). Not my type of guy but he wouldn't make the offense worse and it wouldn't hurt much the team building in my view.. The investment would likely have same or better return at the end. Im sure BB was curious and wouldn't mind at all and Tom wouldn't mind so why would I. The reality is though NE first round picks - even future ones - don't mean much in top bidding wars. And this one ended to be pretty benign.

BB is obviously willing and trying to find top vet WR1, X or whatever one wants to call it for his team for several years now. It will be about opportunity - or he might be even more aggressive than that given the reports on Humphries (north of 10M apy offer with significant guarantees) - and he is not even top tier or WR1/X receiver..

Of course this kind of opportunities are very hard to find for perennial winner - but that doesn't make fans thoughts in that direction silly..