Originally Posted by DJ's left nut:
I'd still have Will Fuller on call if I were Veach.
If this draft goes well enough and we get comfortable with our top 4 WR options (JJSS, MVS, Hardman, draft pick), I would say we have the depth to absorb the injury risk in Fuller and take what we can get when he's healthy.
He's a really REALLY nice fit for this offense and could have a Watkins in the '19 SB run kind of impact if he just happens to be healthy at the right time. And if not, well we wouldn't really be relying on him.
Tremendous player when healthy. Unfortunately that isn't too often these days.
Originally Posted by kccrow:
I agree with a lot of this. I do agree with the "hate." I don't "hate" him and hope I'm not projecting that, I just don't like him as the pick at 30 or 50. My opinion is that's massive reaching based almost exclusively on those athletic traits. Personally, I stand by my comp to MVS with Watson, and I don't think that warrants a day 2 pick. I'd probably grade Watson as a 4th round guy. I don't think he'd be there in the 4th when KC picks, so I'd be mostly okay with him in the late 3rd. I've moved towards the mean by being on board with late 2nd but that's not where I value him. In the end, it doesn't matter what I think but I'm a draft nerd so I guess I just appreciate the thrill of looking back and seeing if my analysis was on or not.
Par for the course.
I've become among the largest 'Watson Haters' as a result of saying I don't think I'd consider him until the late 2nd.
An FCS kid with disappointing production and genuine red flags regarding his readiness for the next level and I'm STILL willing to at least consider the possibility of taking him in the top 70 picks - somehow that makes me a hater, I guess.
Ain't a lot of room for disagreement during draft season. It's just the way it goes... [Reply]
I'd be extremely disappointed with Watson in the first. This class is deep at WR and I see him as more of a mid-late second round guy. Give me a corner or safety in the first over Watson. [Reply]
Originally Posted by DJ's left nut:
Par for the course.
I've become among the largest 'Watson Haters' as a result of saying I don't think I'd consider him until the late 2nd.
An FCS kid with disappointing production and genuine red flags regarding his readiness for the next level and I'm STILL willing to at least consider the possibility of taking him in the top 70 picks - somehow that makes me a hater, I guess.
Ain't a lot of room for disagreement during draft season. It's just the way it goes...
Originally Posted by kccrow:
I agree with a lot of this. I do agree with the "hate." I don't "hate" him and hope I'm not projecting that, I just don't like him as the pick at 30 or 50. My opinion is that's massive reaching based almost exclusively on those athletic traits. Personally, I stand by my comp to MVS with Watson, and I don't think that warrants a day 2 pick. I'd probably grade Watson as a 4th round guy. I don't think he'd be there in the 4th when KC picks, so I'd be mostly okay with him in the late 3rd. I've moved towards the mean by being on board with late 2nd but that's not where I value him. In the end, it doesn't matter what I think but I'm a draft nerd so I guess I just appreciate the thrill of looking back and seeing if my analysis was on or not.
I'm more of a believer in a team taking big swings later, most ideally in the 3rd and 4th rounds. If I were to zone in on a WR with speed for days and on the ascent that might be really good in a couple of years, then give me Danny Gray in the 3rd. A pass rusher that has some amazing physical tools but needs to get bigger and refine technique? Give me Amare Barno in the 3rd. I like those stabs. I think they merit, probably, 4th-round grades but I like them late 3rd because they probably aren't going to be there when KC picks in the 4th.
There's really only one person that I would say is swerving into "hate" territory. And it's neither of you.
I will say, DJ, we've been around and around on his production levels. Considering he had 30 percent of their overall receiving yards (and 35 percent each of his last two seasons), I think you might find the NDSU coaches have a differing opinion on whether his production was disappointing or not.
I know you feel like they would feed him the ball more if he were a truly elite NFL prospect, but I'm not so sure. I see a guy that was clearly their No. 1 weapon when they did throw the ball, on a team that just didn't need to throw the ball much and doesn't believe in it.
He wouldn't be the first guy whose college system didn't take full advantage of him. [Reply]
Originally Posted by DJ's left nut:
I'd still have Will Fuller on call if I were Veach.
If this draft goes well enough and we get comfortable with our top 4 WR options (JJSS, MVS, Hardman, draft pick), I would say we have the depth to absorb the injury risk in Fuller and take what we can get when he's healthy.
He's a really REALLY nice fit for this offense and could have a Watkins in the '19 SB run kind of impact if he just happens to be healthy at the right time. And if not, well we wouldn't really be relying on him.
Originally Posted by DJ's left nut:
Par for the course.
I've become among the largest 'Watson Haters' as a result of saying I don't think I'd consider him until the late 2nd.
An FCS kid with disappointing production and genuine red flags regarding his readiness for the next level and I'm STILL willing to at least consider the possibility of taking him in the top 70 picks - somehow that makes me a hater, I guess.
Ain't a lot of room for disagreement during draft season. It's just the way it goes...
No, I don't think so. I mean as I said a couple of weeks ago on this subject, we're like 12 picks apart on where we'd each take the kid. I think the discussion overall is sometimes bordering on silly, but at the end of the day, you'd consider him as early as #62. I'd take him at #50. Are we really worlds apart? It's 12 picks. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Chris Meck:
No, I don't think so. I mean as I said a couple of weeks ago on this subject, we're like 12 picks apart on where we'd each take the kid. I think the discussion overall is sometimes bordering on silly, but at the end of the day, you'd consider him as early as #62. I'd take him at #50. Are we really worlds apart? It's 12 picks.
Not really. Apart from I think you'd probably be pleased to take him at 50 whereas I'd grumble the whole time I'm turning the card in at 62 and make the VP of player personnel make the announcement so that Watson wouldn't see the sour look on my face when I did it. [Reply]
Cuz he's fast and physical. Until he gets hurt. And I think the roster can accommodate him.
Ultimately I recognize that I'll only get 8(ish) games out of him. My hope would be that it's the RIGHT 8-10 games.
Gimme 3-4 games early in the season to get out of the gates quickly, give me another 2-3 games late in the year to get your feet under you and then a playoff run.
If you can do that at the price point that Fuller's likely to command and all you cost me is a little cap space and a short-term IL stint, that works for me. [Reply]
Originally Posted by DJ's left nut:
Not really. Apart from I think you'd probably be pleased to take him at 50 whereas I'd grumble the whole time I'm turning the card in at 62 and make the VP of player personnel make the announcement so that Watson wouldn't see the sour look on my face when I did it.
Originally Posted by DJ's left nut:
Cuz he's fast and physical. Until he gets hurt. And I think the roster can accommodate him.
Ultimately I recognize that I'll only get 8(ish) games out of him. My hope would be that it's the RIGHT 8-10 games.
Gimme 3-4 games early in the season to get out of the gates quickly, give me another 2-3 games late in the year to get your feet under you and then a playoff run.
If you can do that at the price point that Fuller's likely to command and all you cost me is a little cap space and a short-term IL stint, that works for me.
