CO:Success isn't a given for receivers

[CatMan72]

Good article from the Charlotte Observer on how much of a crapshoot it is to draft a WR: http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2010/04/15/1376968/success-isnt-a-given-for-receivers.html

This is why I think we would be wise to sign a veteran FA WR and spend our 2nd round pick on the best DE or DT on the board.

[theyhateme45]

Yes Wr is a difficult position to evaluate, however you cannot run from drafting the position. If you keep plugging Vets in you will never allow yourself the opportunity to draft a good young WR. We got lucky with Smith, failed with some others... It's a necessary risk that has to be taken.

[R0CKnR0LLA]

I like the part where Mayock basically said Jarrett blows.

[CatMan72]

Yes Wr is a difficult position to evaluate, however you cannot run from drafting the position. If you keep plugging Vets in you will never allow yourself the opportunity to draft a good young WR. We got lucky with Smith, failed with some others... It's a necessary risk that has to be taken.

Good point, but a 2nd round pick is a valuable pick (especially this year) and I don't think we should spend it on a position with such a high rate of failure.

[CatMan72]

I like the part where Mayock basically said Jarrett blows.

Yeah, Mayock said he didn't think Jarrett would be able to get off the line of scrimmage in the NFL... LOL

[Swarly]

Yeah, it sucks how hard it is to evaluate receivers but that doesn't mean we have to count it out. Look at all the bust DT's/DE's in the 2nd round, the same can be said for any receiver.

No risk no reward.

[R0CKnR0LLA]

As the article said, this year is really deep in WR talent in rounds 2 and 3. You can't just translate past success rates over to this draft.

[CatMan72]

Yeah, it sucks how hard it is to evaluate receivers but that doesn't mean we have to count it out. Look at all the bust DT's/DE's in the 2nd round, the same can be said for any receiver.

No risk no reward.

There are busts at every position including DE and DT, but the rate of failure doesn't compare to WR.

[CatMan72]

As the article said, this year is really deep in WR talent in rounds 2 and 3. You can't just translate past success rates over to this draft.

True, but again - under the best of circumstances it's a crapshoot and we need help at that position now, not in 2 or 3 years.

[Wither]

The answer to the problem is obvious: draft a TON of WR's.

[R0CKnR0LLA]

Best circumstance is 50%? It depends on who you pick and how talented they are. That's like saying you can draft a 20 year old Jerry Rice and turn around and say "oh well he's a WR so he'll be a bust half the time".

Where'd you even get 50% from anyway?

[CatMan72]

Best circumstance is 50%? It depends on who you pick and how talented they are. That's like saying you can draft a 20 year old Jerry Rice and turn around and say "oh well he's a WR so he'll be a bust half the time".

Where'd you even get 50% from anyway?

Re-read the article and edited my post after saying 50%, I mis-remembered the context of the 41% stat they quoted when discussing the # WR's taken in the first 48 picks that started as rookies.

Bottom line, I think our 2nd round pick this year is too valuable to spend on a WR.

[CatMan72]

The answer to the problem is obvious: draft a TON of WR's.

I understand the though process here, draft many hoping to find one, but we're short on draft picks this year.

My answer to the problem would be to use our 3rd or 4th on a WR and sign a proven FA to hedge our bet on the rookie.

[CatMan72]

We could also trade our 3rd or 4th this year for a more proven commodity at WR.

Not sure who we could get with a 3rd or a 4th, but I'd imagine we'd have some pretty good options.