Setting the Record Straight on McCaffrey

[Shocker]

McCaffrey will be crazy productive and all his naysayers will dine on crow real early next season.   

[GoobyPls]

Just now, bobcat91 said:

NFL combine numbers 5'11 5/8 and 202.  Almost 210 at pro day

He's not 5'11, they constantly fraud heights. And his game weight is 195

[XClown1986]

3 minutes ago, GoobyPls said:

He's not 5'11, they constantly fraud heights. And his game weight is 195

The combine is where the "fraud" is debunked. Which is why every QB's height measurement is critical at the combine. McCaffrey is just under 6 feet tall. 205 lbs. This is just fact.

[panther4life]

22 minutes ago, Soul Rebel said:

Is the elephant in the room his skin color?

Go ahead and flame away or call me whatever names tickles your fancy, but it's been brought up by big time analysts as well.  

The fact is, you can count on one hand how many white starting RBs there are in the NFL.... and still have fingers left. 

I see the Reggie Bush comps, but I see a hybrid Shady McCoy X Percy Harvin clone. 

To me his skin color is the reason people fantasize about him being some amazing slot receiver. Maybe he can be, but thats based on projection more than production. 

The stereotyping is working against him as a RB and for him as a receiver. 

I don't like him at 8, but the Kid can run between the tackles,which is a knock I often see against him. He knows how to get skinny in the hole and will shake off weak tackles(his signature instinct is to spin out of it). However he is not going to truck people, he's not going to have highlight stiff arm's or things of that nature.

He simply is not a power back. He's an elusive back. 

To me he's player that is electric in open space. Stanford's coaches found ways to make that happen for him in most games and were not afraid to go with jumbo and goaline packages anywhere on the field in order to ensure this. My problem is this does not make him unique to me as NFL player. There are plenty of guys who can make 1 guy miss out in space or sprint to the end zone when untouched.

 

[XClown1986]

2 minutes ago, panther4life said:

To me his skin color is the reason people fantasize about him being some amazing slot receiver. Maybe he can be, but thats based on projection more than production. 

The stereotyping is working against him as a RB and for him as a receiver. 

I don't like him at 8, but the Kid can run between the tackles,which is a knock I often see against him. He knows how to get skinny in the hole and will shake off weak tackles(his signature instinct is to spin out of it). However he is not going to truck people, he's not going to have highlight stiff arm's or things of that nature.

He simply is not a power back. He's an elusive back. 

To me he's player that is electric in open space. Stanford's coaches found ways to make that happen for him in most games and were not afraid to go with jumbo and goaline packages anywhere on the field in order to ensure this. My problem is this does not make him unique to me as NFL player. There are plenty of guys who can make 1 guy miss out in space or sprint to the end zone when untouched.

 

I agree with all but the last part. What makes McCaffrey special is his ability from snap to 5 yards. His vision, cuts, and agility to find the right crease is what separates him from the crowd. He is great in space, but every player can be if they have the speed.

[GoobyPls]

Just now, XClown1986 said:

The combine is where the "fraud" is debunked. Which is why every QB's height measurement is critical at the combine. McCaffrey is just under 6 feet tall. 205 lbs. This is just fact.

I've stood next to Dalvin Cook who according to the combine is 6ft 210. He's not 6ft. And everyone put on weight for the combine 

[EightyNine]

1 hour ago, mjligon said:

I get sick of people comparing player A to player B.

Why can't McCaffrey just be Christian McCaffrey? 

 

Coaches and scouts do that all the time

[PandaPancake]

I like comparing him to his dad. Who had a long career

[panther4life]

29 minutes ago, MHS831 said:

Sorry, but I know Fournette is the better back, but look how McCaffrey would create new looks/match up problems. 

1. He us used to taking handoffs out of the shotgun formation.

2. He is really good behind a FB

3.  He can run good routes and has solid hands.

Fournette is a better RB,  but he gives us power running. His injury history concerns me.  McCaffrey is the better football player, if you ask me. 

Just want to share my thoughts after watching 5 2016 games on draft breakdown. 

 

1. He takes about 7 handoff's  a game out of shotgun. (I know this because I charted him over 5 games). He also does about 2 wildcat plays per game (the shittier the opponent the more he does this).

2. It's more than just a FB. I've posted visual evidence of them having only 1 WR out wide on the majority of his big runs. They run tons of packages where 8-10 people's only job on that play is to block for him and the Defenses know its coming. 

3. He does not run a ton of WR routes or routes that other RB's don't typically run. I saw a lot of wheel routes, crossing routes, screens and just hanging around the los as a dumpoff option. I think in one of highlight films or of the 5 full 2016 games, I've watched I think I did see 1 slant. 

 

This next part has nothing to do with your post.

I feel like I have to list as a disclaimer before someone get's mad at me for doing actual research and sharing it. 

My thoughts or opinion are no more important than others on here, so I hate that I keep stating this same stuff in other threads, but I like talking the draft, so I can't help myself. I also spend plenty of time watching full games before I speak on certain prospects vs just regurgitating scouting reports from google searches, so I like to share my research with others. Please excuse me if I come off as arrogant or like I think I'm something more than just a diehard fan.

 

[panther4life]

13 minutes ago, XClown1986 said:

I agree with all but the last part. What makes McCaffrey special is his ability from snap to 5 yards. His vision, cuts, and agility to find the right crease is what separates him from the crowd. He is great in space, but every player can be if they have the speed.

I think thats a fair statement. I still don't think its enough reason to take him at 8 tho.

[JawnyBlaze]

1 hour ago, bobcat91 said:

Emmitt was 5'9" 215.  McCaffery is 6'1' 210.  He will be bigger in the pro weight room within a year.  I really don't understand why folks don't see how talented he really is.  He is a game changer.  I'm not saying I like him over Fournette, I'm just saying we probably wont get a chance to draft Fournette and this guy is really talented.

I think he is talented and would like to draft him....no earlier than the mid 20s.  We can get a far bigger impact player in the top 10. 5'9 215 is waaay more of a RB build than 6'1 210. McCaffrey is built like a WR. Depending on your point of view he's either less-athletic Reggie Bush or he's golden Tate. I think he could be a very good player in the right system, but at 8 I don't want a gimmick or system player.  I've come to grips with the possibility we might draft him at 8 and if that happens so be it, I won't complain like I would if we got Allen or God forbid Ross. But there's a lot of players that will be there at 8 that will have a bigger impact and have fewer limitations. 

[uscgamecocks]

2 hours ago, Lout said:

I feel like McCaffrey is Reggie Bush 2.0

Is that what we really want to draft at #8? 

McCaffery will be a better pro than Bush.

Bush would be a better pro in today's NFL.

This team desperately needs what McCaffrey (or vintage Bush) would provide.

Predictability was one of our biggest weaknesses on offense last year.  When combined with subpar athleticism at most positions, and particularly at WR, it made us very easy to defend.

McCaffery might not be the most talented player on the board at #8.  But he might make a bigger impact on the offense and team than the more talented guys that are still available.

[MHS831]

1 hour ago, panther4life said:

Just want to share my thoughts after watching 5 2016 games on draft breakdown. 

 

1. He takes about 7 handoff's  a game out of shotgun. (I know this because I charted him over 5 games). He also does about 2 wildcat plays per game (the shittier the opponent the more he does this).

2. It's more than just a FB. I've posted visual evidence of them having only 1 WR out wide on the majority of his big runs. They run tons of packages where 8-10 people's only job on that play is to block for him and the Defenses know its coming. 

3. He does not run a ton of WR routes or routes that other RB's don't typically run. I saw a lot of wheel routes, crossing routes, screens and just hanging around the los as a dumpoff option. I think in one of highlight films or of the 5 full 2016 games, I've watched I think I did see 1 slant. 

 

This next part has nothing to do with your post.

I feel like I have to list as a disclaimer before someone get's mad at me for doing actual research and sharing it. 

My thoughts or opinion are no more important than others on here, so I hate that I keep stating this same stuff in other threads, but I like talking the draft, so I can't help myself. I also spend plenty of time watching full games before I speak on certain prospects vs just regurgitating scouting reports from google searches, so I like to share my research with others. Please excuse me if I come off as arrogant or like I think I'm something more than just a diehard fan.

 

Not Arrogant at all, IMO. 

I have 2 thoughts--1.  What is the new evolved offense we are going to (translation: an offense to protect Cam/give him weapons) and what are its needs?  2. How does McCaffrey meet (or not) those needs and why is he better than a RB we could find in the 3rd round?  So I look for subtle clues....

Here is what we know--we gave Kalil a lot of $$$ to come in as a LT, considering his track record.  His skill set must be a match for what we need at LT.  It could be that Oher is done, but it could be something else.  Kalil is a valuable clue.  If we were going with Fournette, would a different kind of T be better?  I dunno. 

We also know that Tolbert, a good locker room guy and pro bowler, would no longer be needed.  That could mean that we are going away from FBs--but it could also mean we are getting a real FB, something I do not think Tolbert was.

We have shown interest in several TEs, most with blocking ability.  We have met with 5, according to Walter.  Three are Move TEs--meaning they can be Hbacks, motion out into routes, etc.  But the kind of blocking they do is different. Pass blocking,  ISOs etc. instead of power blocking a DT/DE.  Does that clue us to the kind of offense we are talking about?

Who knows.

The last thing we all seem to understand is that we seem to be looking to become more explosive at WR--a better slot WR-(Philly Brown not re-signed) and there is some speculation that KB is not a primary/#1 WR.  If so, we could add a Zay Jones (I hope) iin the second round and bring Byrd up into the slot with WR Charles Johnson (deep ball) and Russell Shepherd (was improving at TB), we could have a nasty group of versatile WRs.  Throw in a power and finesse running game with screens and check down options--maybe we become more dynamic while keeping Cam's jersey a bit cleaner. 

To me, that is probably the plan.  The devil is in the details. 

Good News:  The draft is pretty solid at RB and WR. 

As for the defense, I think we have a nice selection of developmental DEs in the second and third rounds.   We should be able to find a S  and a CB in the mid rounds as well.   THIS is why I do not see us moving up in the draft.  We need a RB, TE, DE, S, CB, and WR, and three or four of them need to contribute early and often.

[t96]

3 hours ago, dave-o said:

Remember when Panther fans were scratching their heads about Luke?  I think McCaffrey is one of those players....

Please stop this comparison, I've seen it numerous times.

A lot of people questioned the Luke pick 100% based on need. Nobody questioned whether he was worthy of a top 10 or top 5 pick even. Coming out of college he was one of the best LB prospects I've ever seen. We didn't have an apparent immediate need at the mike then with Beason which lead to questions as to how we'd deal with it. Obviously, it turned out like it did.

McCaffrey is a whole different story. He actually fits our needs very well and I'd love for him to be a Panther. That being said, he is by no means worth a top 10 pick, not even close. It's questionable whether his skillset will translate to the NFL (it wasn't debatable with Luke). You don't take a chance like that in the top 10 when there are so many better prospects above him. In the second round? By all means. Trade back into the 20s? I'd consider it, but still a little high for my liking. And you may be thinking 20s vs. 8 is there really that big of a difference? Yes. There is.