If the Chiefs took WR Christian Watson at 30…

[staylor26]

How would you feel about that?

[Nightfyre]

I love the discussion fellas. Gimme Burks at 29, Watson at 50, and a high ceiling slot guy in the mid rounds.

[DJ's left nut]

Originally Posted by duncan_idaho

That's fair. I like Tolbert, too. I won't complain and would be excited about both guys. Or Pierce. Really, I'd be excited about anyone except Bell, who is not athletic enough to success in the NFL

Dammit.

At some point this actually turned into a reasonable dialogue about a player.

How the hell did that happen?

**** YOU, DUNCAN! WATSON SUCKS BAWLS!!!

[duncan_idaho]

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

Dammit.

At some point this actually turned into a reasonable dialogue about a player.

How the hell did that happen?

**** YOU, DUNCAN! WATSON SUCKS BAWLS!!!

I know.

Multiple points made, at least on my end an adjustment (slightly down) in estimation of the player.

And now watch him go 22nd to the packers or something. Lol.

[Kiimo]

I wasn't sure which thread to put this in but this guy is a great follow on Twitter

Some had Flowers at 4.4, which bumps the score up slightly. Fast is fast! https://t.co/ARMFPdaXMI pic.twitter.com/Kg8kGBTz5D

— Kent Lee Platte (@MathBomb) April 1, 2022

[kcbubb]

Wow. Great knowledge of history. I love chiefs planet.

Originally Posted by duncan_idaho

A few things...

First, re: Calvin Johnson

1. I've seen a few others say this, too... but Georgia Tech didn't run the triple option when Calvin Johnson was there. Chan Gailey was his coach, and they ran a multiple set, with lot of shotgun and early spread offense concepts.

2. Watson was his team's leading receiver as a sophomore, junior, and senior, just like Megatron was in his 3 years at Georgia Tech. They both played 38 games in those 3 years. You know what the difference in their receiving stats are? 2 catches/game (4.5 in an offense that threw 30 times a game instead of 2.5 in an offense that threw 20 times a game) and 25 yards per game.

Neither one of those offenses morphed into feeding the pig, as it was. Gailey ran it more than he threw it every year he had the biggest unicorn in college sports history.

Switching to that topic...

You're familiar with how successful that NDSU coaching staff has been and what a powerhouse that program is, right? They've won what, 9 of the past 11 championships at that level or something like that?

Even with Trey Lance they didn't alter their run-pass ratio. They have a system and the system and program seem to trump individual talent. Kind of like Nebraska in the Devaney/Osborne days, I guess.

Let's not act like coaching staffs don't make mistakes or stubbornly stick to their system, especially at the college level. Ole Miss had DK Metcalf and AJ Brown at the same time and somehow didn't give the ball to one of them every down.

Regarding his combine stuff...

Watson did run the 3-cone and shuttle at his pro day and put up good numbers in those, as well (above-average shuttle at 4.19 and 3-cone was above average as well at 6.96).

Finally, regarding why we're just hearing about him...

Well, before he got to the senior bowl and combine and started getting individual notice, he was a big, fast dude on a team that has never thrown it even 1 out of 3 downs while he has been there. Hard to get notice that way beyond the FCS level.

[kcbubb]

Then why does it even matter? If mahomes can turn lemons into lemonade, why not take some free agents like mvs? Why use draft capital on middling free agent level wrs? Just get some decent wrs in free agency and use your draft capital for someone who can be davante Adams or tyreek. Go for the home run in the draft. Get Watson or jameson. Or some other wr that has number 1 ability. That’s what I’m interested in. Is there another wr that has tyreek ability?

Originally Posted by duncan_idaho

A few things...

First, re: Calvin Johnson

1. I've seen a few others say this, too... but Georgia Tech didn't run the triple option when Calvin Johnson was there. Chan Gailey was his coach, and they ran a multiple set, with lot of shotgun and early spread offense concepts.

2. Watson was his team's leading receiver as a sophomore, junior, and senior, just like Megatron was in his 3 years at Georgia Tech. They both played 38 games in those 3 years. You know what the difference in their receiving stats are? 2 catches/game (4.5 in an offense that threw 30 times a game instead of 2.5 in an offense that threw 20 times a game) and 25 yards per game.

Neither one of those offenses morphed into feeding the pig, as it was. Gailey ran it more than he threw it every year he had the biggest unicorn in college sports history.

Switching to that topic...

You're familiar with how successful that NDSU coaching staff has been and what a powerhouse that program is, right? They've won what, 9 of the past 11 championships at that level or something like that?

Even with Trey Lance they didn't alter their run-pass ratio. They have a system and the system and program seem to trump individual talent. Kind of like Nebraska in the Devaney/Osborne days, I guess.

Let's not act like coaching staffs don't make mistakes or stubbornly stick to their system, especially at the college level. Ole Miss had DK Metcalf and AJ Brown at the same time and somehow didn't give the ball to one of them every down.

Regarding his combine stuff...

Watson did run the 3-cone and shuttle at his pro day and put up good numbers in those, as well (above-average shuttle at 4.19 and 3-cone was above average as well at 6.96).

Finally, regarding why we're just hearing about him...

Well, before he got to the senior bowl and combine and started getting individual notice, he was a big, fast dude on a team that has never thrown it even 1 out of 3 downs while he has been there. Hard to get notice that way beyond the FCS level.

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

Think of Patrick Mahomes as similar to Coors Field.

There's a saying in baseball circles - "Coors Field doesn't turn bad hitters into good hitters. It turns good hitters into great ones..."

I think that's what an elite quarterback does. He can't turn Demarcus Robinson into Deandre Hopkins. You can't give him guys who just aren't NFL players and have him make them into 1,000 yard guys.

But if you give him 6-700 yard guys, he MIGHT be able to turn them into 1,100 yard guys.

I think the odds of Tolbert or Pierce being merely good NFL players are significantly higher than the odds of Watson being one. And so I'm willing to leave some ceiling on the table for the floor and then let my QB do the rest.

If I had someone like Jimmy Garappolo under center, someone who needs his WRs to carry his water for him, I'm more likely to focus on the ceiling of a player than his floor.

But again - for THIS team - that's just not how I'd operate.

[kcbubb]

DJ can you explain how Austin is better than Watson? I need more detail. I’m not seeing that.

And runkc, I see watson as way better that velus, tyquan, gray or the others in the late speed category. Duncan is right. His athletic ability shows on tape. He’s a stud. his press man needs work. Way too many false steps but the ability is there with quick feet, really amazing quickness, and long arms to defeat the press. Watson is a day one immediate deep threat and immediate gadget player. His natural run after the catch is electric. He’s gonna need work on routes and the basics of the position but watson shows potential to be able to make the transition. Day one, watson is legit deep threat and gadget player and can develop the nuisances of the game over time. Watson has elite level, top 5-10 wr in the league talent but it will have to be groomed. His floor is deep threat and gadget player, which isn’t terrible and better than hardman.

[DJ's left nut]

Originally Posted by kcbubb

DJ can you explain how Austin is better than Watson? I need more detail. I’m not seeing that.

Because when people want to talk about Watson's athleticism, what they really mean is that he's shockingly athletic for someone that TALL.

Because if you want to talk about athleticism, Austin beats him literally across the board.

40: 4.36 vs. 4.32 -- Austin
3-cone: 6.96 vs. 6.65 -- Austin
Shuttle: 4.19 vs. 4.07 -- Austin

Watson is a great athlete, but a generational one? He's not even the best athlete in this class. He's just a very rare sort of athlete for someone as tall as he is.

And I don't care that much about his height. Not in a WCO w/ a QB that can challenge every blade of grass on the field.

Moreover, Austin is hard as a coffin nail. He's tough as ****. He wasn't some undersized slot WR out there looking to avoid contact. He was playing wide, getting off presses, working the middle and attacking the boundaries. To my eyes he is a FAR more dynamic player. He also looks more polished as an actual WR to me - very natural in his movements when he cuts or when he goes after the ball. And because of his build and stature, he's actually REALLY hard to knock off his route. If you get him off stride it just doesn't matter because he foot-fires right back into line.

He's just short. And yeah, that's unfortunate, but when you have a smart offensive staff and an elite QB, not to mention guys like Kelce, JJSS and MVS who can occupy the larger DBs on the defense anyway, you can find a LOT of space for Austin to work in. And if you get him in space, the defense is just completely boned. The way he gets to speed with those incredibly fast feet just make him impossible to isolate and keeps all those easy money sideways short pitch and catches in the playbook. I just don't see that with Watson.

[DJ's left nut]

And again - it isn't to say that he's a better prospect in a vacuum - that's not typically an analysis I'll make or that I think is worth making.

I think he's a better prospect for Kansas City. I think the slight edge in athleticism as well as the way he gets his speed through short, almost violent steps, is a greater advantage in this offense than Watson's height.

I mean yeah, Hill is a lazy comparison, but that's exactly the sort of thing that made Hill such a bitch when he got his shoulders square to a defender as opposed to Hardman's speed that isn't as 'jittery'.

How a guy like Austin gets his speed and his ability to stop/start more quickly is simply more valuable to me than Watson's added height when I'm trying to put pieces around this quarterback in this system.

[DJ's left nut]

One more thing, and it's a point I'm not sure I've made yet, but it involves running mechanics.

Watson is obviously very tall and long legged; he's a long-strider. Now that doesn't mean he's slow to get up to speed because he isn't. But the way he gets his speed to is just eat up turf with every stride, like say Usain Bolt. And on a track there's no downside to that at all.

But in football, with another guy trying to disrupt your stride and/or knock you off your route, it creates an issue.

I was a shitty football player (only bad ballplayer on CP) but I took to coaching well. And one thing I was always taught as a DB was that when you're alongside a receiver, what him in the hands as he's running. You'll never get a flag thrown (I never did) but as he's pumping those arms, if you have a hand down by your hip just giving him a little chuck, you'll throw his running mechanics off. You'll disrupt his stride.

Now when you're a little guy like Austin, literally every time your foot hits the ground again, your body will 'self-correct' and get you back in line. Because the movements were small and precise. You can't really get disrupted much when you're constantly correcting via small movements.

Meanwhile if you're someone that gets his speed like Watson, getting your stride disrupted just ruins the route. You're going to have a much harder time self-correcting because in that 20 yards you run (for example), you took 15 strides with larger, more levery movements. As opposed to a little sparkplug with rapid footfires like Austin who's constantly correcting.

Think of it as making a small correction to catch a skid through a turn vs. power-sliding through it. Oh sure, by the end you're still pointing the same direction, but if you're making smaller and quicker corrections in the skid, you'll come out of the corner in far better shape than if you kick the ass end out and than catch it.

If you give me 2 guys with the same speed but one of them is 6 inches shorter than the other, that shorter guy is going to have more functional 'football' speed damn near every single time.

And when you see Austin out there playing the Z at Memphis, you can see exactly what I'm talking about. People just thought they could body this little dude off his route and then they realize real fast that this guy is damn sturdy and uses that shorter stature to make himself damn near impossible to re-route.

Whereas Watson, that IS one of the concerns I've read about him. He's a guy you can knock off his route - and that's just not terribly surprising. It makes all the sense in the world when you think about the physics that have to be involved in a 6'5" guy's running mechanics.

And it won't show up on the highlights we watch because you just won't see the plays where the QB doesn't go his way on those tapes because he got taken off his route.

[kcbubb]

I think that’s a fair assessment of equal speed for short guys vs tall guys but the little guys with dinosaur arms have to get off the jam and Austin is tiny. He’s not muscled up like hill. Is Austin gonna get bullied in the nfl? Austin is only 5’7” and 170 lbs. I don’t know if he’ll get bullied or not. He’s one my fav late round guys. Maybe our late 3rd? I don’t know but his size and how he’ll handle the press and contact is a risk with his size but I do like him.

One thing to notice is that Watson’s 10 yard split is 1.45, which is crazy. Austin’s 10 yd split is 1.5. Watson’s quickness is real and it shows. Watch him on in the senior bowl and his quickness is crazy for his size. His catch range is also a plus. Watson’s size and long arms are also a plus against the press and any kind of contact. Watsons floor is a deep threat and gadget guy. I’m not sure what Austin’s floor is. Maybe tavon austin?

I’d take watson in the first. He’s worth the risk for me with his tape. It’s risky with his numbers and competition but he’s got burst, change of direction. He doesn’t have to build up his speed. He’s a freak and again, you see it on his tape. He’s not an underwear guy. Huge hands and he can catch and run routes. He’s raw. But can it translate to the nfl? I don’t know. That’s why jameson is worth a trade up for me. He’s dominated the big boys in college. But austin is intriguing in the late third or early 4th for me. I like him. But he doesn’t have the ceiling of watson, not close.

[kcbubb]

Also, if we ar going with a little wr, I really like wandale Robinson. He’s really shifty and compact. Mini deebo. He’s not the deep threat that austin is though.

[Chargem]

I really hope they take 2 shots at WR in the draft, but it seems relatively unlikely to me. I think Andy normally carries 6 WR, and you have JJSS, MVS, Hardman locking up the first 3 slots. If the rumours about another veteran are true, it just seems unlikely.

[Coochie liquor]

Originally Posted by Chris Meck

I'd run up to the podium if Watson was there at #62.

You might get in trouble, but I’ll watch for you.

[RealSNR]

Originally Posted by kcbubb

Picking a wr in the first is not based on NEED. It’s based on VALUE. The value for de & dt is in the 2nd. Big drop off for wrs in the 2nd.

You sound like 2018 Brett Veach justifying the Breeland Speaks trade up