Jarvis Landry-WR-LSU

Originally posted by Kolohe:

Vernon Davis doesn't exactly play like he runs a 4.38 does he, Richard Sherman's 4.65 speed has absolutely no problem hanging with Vernon Davis.

That's what Vernon ran as a rookie. That was 7 years ago.

And being covered deep isn't always about speed; it's mostly about how accurately / on time the ball is thrown. And how much room the DB gives him as a cushion.

Your example does nothing to address the need for a WR to be able to create separation from NFL DBs on a regular basis.

I think he was a high 2nd round pick before the Combine and everyone knew he wasn't that fast. A 4.7 makes it hard for a GM to justify an early pick, but his game tape is as good as anyone's at the position. The depth at the position also works against him.

I'm expecting a 4.6 - 4.65 time at his Pro Day, which will be enough to keep him in the mid-late 2nd round range. I hope we cut Baldwin, draft Landry and another WR...

This is how I think it'll go down: If Evans is on the board in the 15-20 range, we're going after him hard. If we miss on Evans, Lee is gone, and Cooks is available, he's our guy.

Originally posted by VPofCarnage:

Originally posted by Kolohe:
Vernon Davis doesn't exactly play like he runs a 4.38 does he, Richard Sherman's 4.65 speed has absolutely no problem hanging with Vernon Davis.

That's what Vernon ran as a rookie. That was 7 years ago.

And being covered deep isn't always about speed; it's mostly about how accurately / on time the ball is thrown. And how much room the DB gives him as a cushion.

Your example does nothing to address the need for a WR to be able to create separation from NFL DBs on a regular basis.

Yah go ahead and tell Vernon Davis workout warrior that he can't run that now, I bet my life savings he can still run it if given time to train for it of course. But anyway, I'm not talking about Cb's covering a receiver deep or about a certain receiver unable to create separation. My whole point to my post was to say that a 40 time is almost irrelevant when using it to measure a football players skill, keywords there was football player. Now if this were the Olympics.....we got a problem!!!!

Originally posted by Kolohe:

My whole point to my post was to say that a 40 time is almost irrelevant when using it to measure a football players skill, keywords there was football player. Now if this were the Olympics.....we got a problem!!!!

The 40 time itself is irrelevant. The receiver's speed is not. And all the drills at the combine do a pretty good job of showing (1) how much agility a guy has (2) how fast a guy can accelerate and (3) how much "long" speed a guy has. The 40 time is a good indication of that 2nd gear. Is it always accurate? Of course not. But let's be realistic here. A guy who runs a 4.77 is REALLY slow. If he was just hurt then I'll take back everything I said about it, but I'm not taking his word for it. He's going to have to prove it on pro day.

Originally posted by VPofCarnage:

Originally posted by Kolohe:
My whole point to my post was to say that a 40 time is almost irrelevant when using it to measure a football players skill, keywords there was football player. Now if this were the Olympics.....we got a problem!!!!

The 40 time itself is irrelevant. The receiver's speed is not. And all the drills at the combine do a pretty good job of showing (1) how much agility a guy has (2) how fast a guy can accelerate and (3) how much "long" speed a guy has. The 40 time is a good indication of that 2nd gear. Is it always accurate? Of course not. But let's be realistic here. A guy who runs a 4.77 is REALLY slow. If he was just hurt then I'll take back everything I said about it, but I'm not taking his word for it. He's going to have to prove it on pro day.

Well unless you know him personally, I think you're gonna have to take his word for it. I mean it's like you're purely judging him on his 40 time, saying a guy who runs 4.77 is REALLY slow....C'mon go back and watch a game will ya cheesus!!! This guy has shown just as much or the same speed as a Michael Crabtree who isn't a burner himself on the field either. Seriously, judging by his play, I would've guessed he runs a 4.5 40 time, its not like he can't run away from DB's.

Originally posted by Kolohe:

Well unless you know him personally, I think you're gonna have to take his word for it. I mean it's like you're purely judging him on his 40 time, saying a guy who runs 4.77 is REALLY slow....C'mon go back and watch a game will ya cheesus!!! This guy has shown just as much or the same speed as a Michael Crabtree who isn't a burner himself on the field either. Seriously, judging by his play, I would've guessed he runs a 4.5 40 time, its not like he can't run away from DB's.

Not every good college receiver is good in the pro's. I never said the guy can't play at all. I've seen a ton of LSU. He has great hands & he's tough. He has good ball awareness & is a solid route runner. But he's not going up against SEC DBs in the NFL. And no I'm not going to take a pro athlete's word for anything. There are too many things working against him. Slow, small, played opposite a great receiver in Beckham, played with one of the better college QBs out there in Mettenberger.

I actually expect him to make a roster somewhere. But unless he improves upon that 40 time my guess is he's 6th rounder or worse. It's not like it'd just be a slow time; it'd be the slowest time of any receiver in the NFL and slower than the majority of TEs.

Oh yeah, and a short receiver with an attrocious vertical leap is going to have problems going up for the ball.

When I see Landry, I see Wes Welker w/ better hands
But I think he's ganna have to be in the right system to succeed

Originally posted by strickac:
I think he was a high 2nd round pick before the Combine and everyone knew he wasn't that fast. A 4.7 makes it hard for a GM to justify an early pick, but his game tape is as good as anyone's at the position. The depth at the position also works against him.

I'm expecting a 4.6 - 4.65 time at his Pro Day, which will be enough to keep him in the mid-late 2nd round range. I hope we cut Baldwin, draft Landry and another WR...

This is how I think it'll go down: If Evans is on the board in the 15-20 range, we're going after him hard. If we miss on Evans, Lee is gone, and Cooks is available, he's our guy.

Why???

Originally posted by KID9R:

Originally posted by Kolohe:
Seriously, people are crazy if they pass on Landry due to a weak 4.77 40 time. Landry is a straight baller with on-field speed screw track speed.

Vernon Davis doesn't exactly play like he runs a 4.38 does he, Richard Sherman's 4.65 speed has absolutely no problem hanging with Vernon Davis.

40 times are cool, but they're exactly that....a 40 time, that crap doesn't translate to football, I got another person you should ask in Derrius Heyward-Bey how his 40 time is helping him in the NFL.

I guess GM's have been timing them every year since Paul Brown just for fun. It's obliviously not the cut and dry factor for NFL success but generally fast players are better than slow players. And Vernon does blow past Sherman when there's not a handful of jersey being grabbed.

The 40 time is just one more piece to the puzzle. It doesn't mean everything... doesn't necessarily mean anything. It is just more factor that can make a "scout" decide to go back and re-watch a prospect to see if things match his original perceptions of his earlier viewings. With Landry... "scouts" will see the 40 time... the poor vertical.. and they will scratch their heads... and then go back and watch more tape of him to see what is what. Mayock calls it "checking the boxes"... and he's right. Had Jarvis ran a 4.5, there would be no need to look further... check the box... move on. But when you see poor test results.. you go back and make sure to dig out the truth.

Me? I dropped him to an early 3rd rd value. Maybe that makes me a Combine knee-jerker... but I feel that the 40 combined with the miserable 28.5 vertical keeps me from checking off the boxes. That doesn't mean I won't raise him up again after watching more and seeing his pro-day results. Also doesn't mean I'd be upset if SF drafted him earlier than rd 3.


Combine numbers are fun... but not the ultimate deciding factor. They are just little pieces of a prospect's puzzle to further examine... and those pieces can either confirm initial assessments.. or challenge them.

The 40 time is just one more piece to the puzzle. It doesn't mean everything... doesn't necessarily mean anything. It is just more factor that can make a "scout" decide to go back and re-watch a prospect to see if things match his original perceptions of his earlier viewings. With Landry... "scouts" will see the 40 time... the poor vertical.. and they will scratch their heads... and then go back and watch more tape of him to see what is what. Mayock calls it "checking the boxes"... and he's right. Had Jarvis ran a 4.5, there would be no need to look further... check the box... move on. But when you see poor test results.. you go back and make sure to dig out the truth.

Me? I dropped him to an early 3rd rd value. Maybe that makes me a Combine knee-jerker... but I feel that the 40 combined with the miserable 28.5 vertical keeps me from checking off the boxes. That doesn't mean I won't raise him up again after watching more and seeing his pro-day results. Also doesn't mean I'd be upset if SF drafted him earlier than rd 3.

Combine numbers are fun... but not the ultimate deciding factor. They are just little pieces of a prospect's puzzle to further examine... and those pieces can either confirm initial assessments.. or challenge them.

Originally posted by Mr.Mcgibblets:
The 40 time is just one more piece to the puzzle. It doesn't mean everything... doesn't necessarily mean anything. It is just more factor that can make a "scout" decide to go back and re-watch a prospect to see if things match his original perceptions of his earlier viewings. With Landry... "scouts" will see the 40 time... the poor vertical.. and they will scratch their heads... and then go back and watch more tape of him to see what is what. Mayock calls it "checking the boxes"... and he's right. Had Jarvis ran a 4.5, there would be no need to look further... check the box... move on. But when you see poor test results.. you go back and make sure to dig out the truth.

Me? I dropped him to an early 3rd rd value. Maybe that makes me a Combine knee-jerker... but I feel that the 40 combined with the miserable 28.5 vertical keeps me from checking off the boxes. That doesn't mean I won't raise him up again after watching more and seeing his pro-day results. Also doesn't mean I'd be upset if SF drafted him earlier than rd 3.

Combine numbers are fun... but not the ultimate deciding factor. They are just little pieces of a prospect's puzzle to further examine... and those pieces can either confirm initial assessments.. or challenge them.

Good Morning Mac! Good post! For years I've been watching Mock Drafts elevate players after the combine and then they settle back after the experts watch more film. Watching Landry catch the ball over, around and through DBs makes me think he will succeed in the NFL...no matter his time and jumping ability. I have greater questions when guys tend to disappear in games, or have drop or character issues. But, once again, those can be overblown as well.

I love watching the 3 cone drills and field work (when I can get the time) because they show agility and balance...particularly with the DBs and linemen--both D and O. Those positions require the ability to react and change direction. If you take into account size and 3 cone times you learn more than a two hundredths slower 40 time. The 40 is more significant for WRs and RBs...players who determine direction as opposed to reacting.

Originally posted by dtg_9er:
Good Morning Mac! Good post! For years I've been watching Mock Drafts elevate players after the combine and then they settle back after the experts watch more film. Watching Landry catch the ball over, around and through DBs makes me think he will succeed in the NFL...no matter his time and jumping ability. I have greater questions when guys tend to disappear in games, or have drop or character issues. But, once again, those can be overblown as well.

I love watching the 3 cone drills and field work (when I can get the time) because they show agility and balance...particularly with the DBs and linemen--both D and O. Those positions require the ability to react and change direction. If you take into account size and 3 cone times you learn more than a two hundredths slower 40 time. The 40 is more significant for WRs and RBs...players who determine direction as opposed to reacting.

... was a great 4 days of soaking in all the Combine fun. Now, I spend the week re-watching drills and absorbing everything 2014 Draft- related.

What a sick and committed hobby this is. Hey, if you ever want to check out my prospect rankings for curiosity or laughs, by all means... v

http://www.footballsfuture.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=542521

Originally posted by Kolohe:

Originally posted by VPofCarnage:

Originally posted by Kolohe:
My whole point to my post was to say that a 40 time is almost irrelevant when using it to measure a football players skill, keywords there was football player. Now if this were the Olympics.....we got a problem!!!!

The 40 time itself is irrelevant. The receiver's speed is not. And all the drills at the combine do a pretty good job of showing (1) how much agility a guy has (2) how fast a guy can accelerate and (3) how much "long" speed a guy has. The 40 time is a good indication of that 2nd gear. Is it always accurate? Of course not. But let's be realistic here. A guy who runs a 4.77 is REALLY slow. If he was just hurt then I'll take back everything I said about it, but I'm not taking his word for it. He's going to have to prove it on pro day.

Well unless you know him personally, I think you're gonna have to take his word for it. I mean it's like you're purely judging him on his 40 time, saying a guy who runs 4.77 is REALLY slow....C'mon go back and watch a game will ya cheesus!!! This guy has shown just as much or the same speed as a Michael Crabtree who isn't a burner himself on the field either. Seriously, judging by his play, I would've guessed he runs a 4.5 40 time, its not like he can't run away from DB's.

i've given up on debating this with Carnage. the poster admits that he's watch LSU games, sees that Landry has good ball awareness, good route runner, tough, with great hands, but because of his 40 time, he falls to a 6th rd value according to him. it's ridiculous. and to say that he won't be going against SEC defenders in the NFL, that's obvious!! but going against the SEC, arguable the best conference in the nation, it's a great way to get ready for the pros.

Originally posted by Kolohe:

Originally posted by VPofCarnage:

Originally posted by Kolohe:
Vernon Davis doesn't exactly play like he runs a 4.38 does he, Richard Sherman's 4.65 speed has absolutely no problem hanging with Vernon Davis.

That's what Vernon ran as a rookie. That was 7 years ago.

And being covered deep isn't always about speed; it's mostly about how accurately / on time the ball is thrown. And how much room the DB gives him as a cushion.

Your example does nothing to address the need for a WR to be able to create separation from NFL DBs on a regular basis.

Yah go ahead and tell Vernon Davis workout warrior that he can't run that now, I bet my life savings he can still run it if given time to train for it of course. But anyway, I'm not talking about Cb's covering a receiver deep or about a certain receiver unable to create separation. My whole point to my post was to say that a 40 time is almost irrelevant when using it to measure a football players skill, keywords there was football player. Now if this were the Olympics.....we got a problem!!!!

this is why i've stopped watching the combine. remember jason hill ripping up the 40?

Originally posted by communist:

Originally posted by strickac:

I think he was a high 2nd round pick before the Combine and everyone knew he wasn't that fast. A 4.7 makes it hard for a GM to justify an early pick, but his game tape is as good as anyone's at the position. The depth at the position also works against him.

I'm expecting a 4.6 - 4.65 time at his Pro Day, which will be enough to keep him in the mid-late 2nd round range. I hope we cut Baldwin, draft Landry and another WR...

This is how I think it'll go down: If Evans is on the board in the 15-20 range, we're going after him hard. If we miss on Evans, Lee is gone, and Cooks is available, he's our guy.

Why???

I just have no faith in him as a player. I thought he was over-drafted coming out due to his speed/height. He looked better on paper. Granted, he just took a pay cut and he'll probably be with us to compete at training camp. So in reality, no, I don't think we should cut him. I think we should draft a WR early to challenge Patton for the #3 spot and I would like to see another guy brought in to compete with Baldwin for the 5th spot. There's bought to be a solid prospect that drops from the 2nd to the 3rd. Landry or Moncrief perhaps.