Originally Posted by BossChief:
Every time I watch him, I can't help but think it's Jamaal Charles running the ball. Plays just like him...I mean, the pick would grow on me but this is a super deep RB class where a good player can be had in the mid to late rounds.
Cook has shoulder trouble, runs around with thugs and has fumbles too much for a first rounder.
Yep, thought the same. Difference is character. JC was special. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Mecca:
It's because if you watch him play that test goes out the window at no point in his career that did Cook ever looked like he lacked explosion or speed or bust. The guy literally dominated everyone he played, made a ton of big plays and was a factor in the pass game.
Also agree, and I'm not even a Cook to KC fan. The test results can ultimately confirm or contrast a player's tape. In this case, they contrast, and I believe the winner of that battle is the tape. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Mecca:
It's because if you watch him play that test goes out the window at no point in his career that did Cook ever looked like he lacked explosion or speed or bust. The guy literally dominated everyone he played, made a ton of big plays and was a factor in the pass game.
Sure, he certainly made big plays and looks like he has good burst. He also had huge holes to run through and was caught from behind quite a bit.
So it begs the question, why did he do so miserably at the combine? [Reply]
Originally Posted by Sandy Cheeks:
Also agree, and I'm not even a Cook to KC fan. The test results can ultimately confirm or contrast a player's tape. In this case, they contrast, and I believe the winner of that battle is the tape.
You don't just pick a winner. If it contrasts then you ask why, and re-evaluate. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Sandy Cheeks:
well of course... and in doing so, the look back shows that the test results lose.
The results don't have to lose, or win for that matter. Instead they factor into the decision of where it's worth taking him. It's just not as simple as one or the other. [Reply]
Originally Posted by KChiefs1:
What about Alvin Kamara?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Leonard Fournette wouldn't even be a good pick.
You do not take 1st round RBs in this era unless they are a once every 5 years kind of talent; someone who with a little health and some luck could build a HoF resume.
There isn't one of those in this draft.
I'd take Kamara in the 2nd and at this point I'm pretty sure I'd take him ahead of Cook. I would not take either of them in the 1st. Or any other back in this class. [Reply]
Originally Posted by DJ's left nut:
Leonard Fournette wouldn't even be a good pick.
You do not take 1st round RBs in this era unless they are a once every 5 years kind of talent; someone who with a little health and some luck could build a HoF resume.
There isn't one of those in this draft.
I'd take Kamara in the 2nd and at this point I'm pretty sure I'd take him ahead of Cook. I would not take either of them in the 1st. Or any other back in this class.
There are several positions I'd take that approach with. RB, inside linebacker, interior o-Line, and arguably safety as well... There just happens to be an Inside Linebacker I'd take in the first round this year in Foster (and there is a possibility he slips to 20 or so). [Reply]
Originally Posted by Sandy Cheeks:
well of course... and in doing so, the look back shows that the test results lose.
If it's one test - sure.
They ALL suck. He can't jump, he can't cut, his shuttle times blow. Those are heavy HEAVY legs. And normally "he plays faster than he times" is just a scout's excuse to follow pre-conceived notions. Very few players actually do that.
Speed on the stopwatch, for most players, is a very fair approximation of their speed on the field and if you're watching them roast people and it belies every measurement you have, it's more likely that they are simply beating up on weaklings or are products of superior teammates than it is that they simply aren't effected by a few ounces of pads as much as everyone else is.
Cook's a shorter Latavius Murray. I do not believe he'd be an upgrade on Spencer Ware. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Sandy Cheeks:
well of course... and in doing so, the look back shows that the test results lose.
I don't believe it's an either/or thing here.
When i watch him i see a guy with good burst and so-so top end speed. He's a hard guy to gauge because a lot of his big plays come from massive holes in the defense, holes that ANY NFL caliber back would be expected to burst through. On a lot of those runs though, he gets caught from behind which would suggest he lacks that vertical speed, just as his SPARQ suggests.
He's got good hands and he's difficult to tackle around the legs.
His SPARQ suggests that he's not an agile player and he lacks top end speed.
I think that's evident when you watch him play. [Reply]
Originally Posted by DJ's left nut:
Leonard Fournette wouldn't even be a good pick.
You do not take 1st round RBs in this era unless they are a once every 5 years kind of talent; someone who with a little health and some luck could build a HoF resume.
There isn't one of those in this draft.
I'd take Kamara in the 2nd and at this point I'm pretty sure I'd take him ahead of Cook. I would not take either of them in the 1st. Or any other back in this class.
I wouldn't take Fournette either. Big bruiser type backs generally have a short shelf life. [Reply]
Originally Posted by DJ's left nut:
Leonard Fournette wouldn't even be a good pick.
You do not take 1st round RBs in this era unless they are a once every 5 years kind of talent; someone who with a little health and some luck could build a HoF resume.
There isn't one of those in this draft.
I'd take Kamara in the 2nd and at this point I'm pretty sure I'd take him ahead of Cook. I would not take either of them in the 1st. Or any other back in this class.
Disagree here. I think Fournette is the next Adrian Peterson. Dude's a beast. [Reply]