Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

At WR would you rather draft for......


Camsfanclub

Recommended Posts

potential or current value even if that is the players ceiling?

 

I keep hearing Benjamin as the wr most people want, but i keep hearing scouts say he is stiff in space and drops the easy balls(Does a certain receiver who may or may not wear #11 come to mind?)

 

Or draft a receiver like Jordan Matthews who clearly does not have benjamins potential, but appears to be the more polished wr.

 

Id rather have the sure thing, but thats just me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Benjamin, like Lafell has lapses in concentration. Other than that they are nothing alike. But I hear you.

The more video I watch, the more I like Landry and Beckham. But I want a big receiver more, we need a red zone threat. Benjamin, Moncrief, Matthews all would be fine by me.

Seriously need to douple dip tho. I wonder if they do tag Hardy an trade him if Oakland would be willing to give up there 2nd and 3rd.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thats the point. Polished receivers tends to drop while the raw guys gets drafted high. Thats even more true in the NBA. These decision makers tends to like those with the higher ceiling.

I dont really care who we take at reciever. He just need to be a stud. Whether thats KB, Matthews, Beckham, Moncrief, etc.

But, the KB to LaFail comparison that Ive seen in the last couple of days is really disturbing. Theyre nothing alike!!!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thats the point. Polished receivers tends to drop while the raw guys gets drafted high. Thats even more true in the NBA. These decision makers tends to like those with the higher ceiling.

I dont really care who we take at reciever. He just need to be a stud. Whether thats KB, Matthews, Beckham, Moncrief, etc.

But, the KB to LaFail comparison that Ive seen in the last couple of days is really disturbing. Theyre nothing alike!!!!!

I disagree, they are somewhat similar coming out of college. Look at the draft profiles of both of them coming out of college.

Lafell

 

Benjamin

 

Similarities:

Poor route running

Lapses in concentration

Good Speed (but not great)

Good Catch Radius

Not Vertical Threats

 

Differences:

Height

Benjamin is better in jump ball situations 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I disagree, they are somewhat similar coming out of college. Look at the draft profiles of both of them coming out of college.

Lafell

 

Benjamin

 

Similarities:

Poor route running

Lapses in concentration

Good Speed (but not great)

Good Catch Radius

Not Vertical Threats

 

Differences:

Height

Benjamin is better in jump ball situations 

 

That's some damn draft profiles. The way you sound, I really think you have not seen a single snap of Benjamin.

 

(1) Go on YouTube

(2) Type in "Kelvin Benjamin"

(3) Click a vid.

(4) Watch it

(5) Tell me if you see the same wide receiver to LaFail

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

potential or current value even if that is the players ceiling?

 

I keep hearing Benjamin as the wr most people want, but i keep hearing scouts say he is stiff in space and drops the easy balls(Does a certain receiver who may or may not wear #11 come to mind?)

 

Or draft a receiver like Jordan Matthews who clearly does not have benjamins potential, but appears to be the more polished wr.

 

Id rather have the sure thing, but thats just me.

 

 

Benjamin! He only played 2 yrs in college and  had 15 + td this season.  Standing  6'5" he would compliment Olsen  and allow Smitty to move to the Slot and we could pick him up in 2nd round while still getting a OL  in the 1st.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Benjamin! He only played 2 yrs in college and  had 15 + td this season.  Standing  6'5" he would compliment Olsen  and allow Smitty to move to the Slot and we could pick him up in 2nd round while still getting a OL  in the 1st.

He wont last to the 2nd, hes on the rise and i cant imagine hed fall after the combine. Proj: Mid 1st

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's some damn draft profiles. The way you sound, I really think you have not seen a single snap of Benjamin.

 

(1) Go on YouTube

(2) Type in "Kelvin Benjamin"

(3) Click a vid.

(4) Watch it

(5) Tell me if you see the same wide receiver to LaFail

 

Dwayne Jarrett had a good highlight tape and college career, whats your point?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Matthews without a doubt. He runs good routes and gets open while being double or tripled covered. He was Vandy's only legimate weapon, and still put up numbers. Benjamin is more like Stephen Hill without his speed or you could say Boldin without route running skills. It's fun to have a weapon in the redzone to throw it up to, but Lions got one of those as UDFA (Fuaria). You draft a limited receiver in the first or second round.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Benjamin, like Lafell has lapses in concentration. Other than that they are nothing alike. But I hear you.

The more video I watch, the more I like Landry and Beckham. But I want a big receiver more, we need a red zone threat. Benjamin, Moncrief, Matthews all would be fine by me.

Seriously need to douple dip tho. I wonder if they do tag Hardy an trade him if Oakland would be willing to give up there 2nd and 3rd.

 

hardy is a first round tag.

 

he has the second most sacks in the NFL. and is in the top 3 best defensive ends in the nfl right now.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Congratulations do they know who the father is?
    • In my opinion Fitterer was probably right about not paying McCaffrey. Now not wanting to "pay RBs" in my opinion isn't something you want to set in stone, to me it all comes down to the individual.
    • Maybe I'm just not understanding, but everywhere that I have read says that signing bonuses go against the cap prorated by as much as five years. The following example uses Andrew Luck's rookie contract as an example. "Take Andrew Luck, the first overall pick in the 2012 NFL draft. Luck signed a four-year contract with the Colts worth $22.1 million and included a $14.5 million signing bonus. Rather than a $14.5 million cap hit in 2012, the Colts spread out his signing bonus over the life of his contract. The hit against the cap would be $3.625 million per year over four years instead of a direct cap hit of $14.5 million directly in 2012. This gave the Colts more leverage and cap flexibility in signing other players." https://www.the33rdteam.com/nfl-signing-bonuses-explained/ I don't know why some of you think that signing bonuses aren't counted against the cap over the length of the contract, but whatever.   "The bonus with a signing is usually the most garish aspect of a rookie contract. Bonus is the immediate cash players receive when they ink a deal. It factors into the cap, but only for the whole contract duration, in terms of salary cap calculations. In the case of Bryce Young’s $24.6 million signing bonus, that’s prorated to approximately $6.15 million per season over a four-year deal. This format allows teams to handle the cap and provides rookies with some short-term fiscal stability, which is important given the high injury risk in this league." https://collegefootballnetwork.com/how-rookie-contracts-work-in-the-nfl/ I understand how signing bonuses can be a useful tool in order to manage the cap, and as one of the article suggests, signing bonuses may become important if you have a tight cap, but the bill is always going to come due. I'm not necessarily referring to you Tuka, but it seems to me that others simply don't want to understand that fact which is why they're reacting to what I'm saying negatively. How odd. In any event, I have a better general understanding of why signing bonuses are used now, and it's generally to fit salaries under the cap. Surely players, whether they be rookies or not, love a signing bonus because they get a good portion of their money up front. This in turn gives them more security and probably amounts to tax benefits as well. I also understand why teams would not want to use signing bonuses, particularly for players or draftees who have a higher probability of being gone before a contract even ends.
×
×
  • Create New...