If you were to build a roster, would you select more small (< 6') and quick "slot-type" wide receivers or big (6'4"+) and physical targets?
Post Reply
1 of 1
Wide Receiver Preference
2,528 Views |
26 Replies |
Last: 1 yr ago by GivemTheAxe
Taller, bigger WRs are definitely in fashion lately, with part of the reason being they are also often fast and super-athletic. But the smaller guys often offer a complimentary skill set (ultra-quick, sometimes better in space, YAC). So I'd go for a mix, with maybe a weight to the bigger.
(obviously take "better", regardless of size)
Wadeva gets it in the end zone.
Unit3IdaSproul said:
If you were to build a roster, would you select more small (< 6') and quick "slot-type" wide receivers or big (6'4"+) and physical targets?
Bigger wide receivers since guys in the secondary are often pretty small.
Nothing against little guys like Brian Treggs, but all else being equal I want a guy who will be able to come down with a contested ball.
dimitrig said:Unit3IdaSproul said:
If you were to build a roster, would you select more small (< 6') and quick "slot-type" wide receivers or big (6'4"+) and physical targets?
Bigger wide receivers since guys in the secondary are often pretty small.
Nothing against little guys like Brian Treggs, but all else being equal I want a guy who will be able to come down with a contested ball.
You want guys who are going to have a comparative advantage over the average DB of some sort: stronger, faster, taller, smarter…. So Desean Jackson didn't need to get stronger and bulkier (as our strength trainer thought), because his great weapon was unmatched speed, quickness and agility but additional bulk would reduce that advantage making him more average.
If you are going to be short and quick, you need to be REALLY quick.
It is the existence of short, quick WRs that leads to CBs who are short and quick, giving taller WRs an advantage.
If all WRs were tall as their primary advantage, most DBs would be tall too.
I'd have what we had in 2013, a bunch of big guys + Treggs and Harper. That was an unbelievable group. I think 5 guys went pro.Big C said:
Taller, bigger WRs are definitely in fashion lately, with part of the reason being they are also often fast and super-athletic. But the smaller guys often offer a complimentary skill set (ultra-quick, sometimes better in space, YAC). So I'd go for a mix, with maybe a weight to the bigger.
(obviously take "better", regardless of size)
calumnus said:dimitrig said:Unit3IdaSproul said:
If you were to build a roster, would you select more small (< 6') and quick "slot-type" wide receivers or big (6'4"+) and physical targets?
Bigger wide receivers since guys in the secondary are often pretty small.
Nothing against little guys like Brian Treggs, but all else being equal I want a guy who will be able to come down with a contested ball.
You want guys who are going to have a comparative advantage over the average DB of some sort: stronger, faster, taller, smarter…. So Desean Jackson didn't need to get stronger and bulkier (as our strength trainer thought), because his great weapon was unmatched speed, quickness and agility but additional bulk would reduce that advantage making him more average.
If you are going to be short and quick, you need to be REALLY quick.
It is the existence of short, quick WRs that leads to CBs who are short and quick, giving taller WRs an advantage.
If all WRs were tall as their primary advantage, most DBs would be tall too.
I get what you are saying, but DBs need to react and cover a lot of space and WRs do not. So I would say speed is more important to a DB than a WR. Yes, a WR needs speed, too, in order to gain separation but height is more important to a WR than a DB. Obviously, the best trait a WR needs to have is good hands. It seems like college WRs drop a lot of balls.
This article makes an argument for why CBs need speed and agility more than WRs:
https://www.acmepackingcompany.com/platform/amp/by-the-numbers/2021/5/30/22460004/against-tall-corners-stokes-kevin-king-jaire-alexander-richard-sherman-lenny-walls
Small, quick possession receivers have a role but if I had to choose one trait in a WR it would be size.
dimitrig said:calumnus said:dimitrig said:Unit3IdaSproul said:
If you were to build a roster, would you select more small (< 6') and quick "slot-type" wide receivers or big (6'4"+) and physical targets?
Bigger wide receivers since guys in the secondary are often pretty small.
Nothing against little guys like Brian Treggs, but all else being equal I want a guy who will be able to come down with a contested ball.
You want guys who are going to have a comparative advantage over the average DB of some sort: stronger, faster, taller, smarter…. So Desean Jackson didn't need to get stronger and bulkier (as our strength trainer thought), because his great weapon was unmatched speed, quickness and agility but additional bulk would reduce that advantage making him more average.
If you are going to be short and quick, you need to be REALLY quick.
It is the existence of short, quick WRs that leads to CBs who are short and quick, giving taller WRs an advantage.
If all WRs were tall as their primary advantage, most DBs would be tall too.
I get what you are saying, but DBs need to react and cover a lot of space and WRs do not. So I would say speed is more important to a DB than a WR. Yes, a WR needs speed, too, in order to gain separation but height is more important to a WR than a DB. Obviously, the best trait a WR needs to have is good hands. It seems like college WRs drop a lot of balls.
This article makes an argument for why CBs need speed and agility more than WRs:
https://www.acmepackingcompany.com/platform/amp/by-the-numbers/2021/5/30/22460004/against-tall-corners-stokes-kevin-king-jaire-alexander-richard-sherman-lenny-walls
Small, quick possession receivers have a role but if I had to choose one trait in a WR it would be size.
Yes, that is a good point. CBs have to react, toughest job in sports. They are going to favor quickness at the expense of height. For a WR to beat quickness,, they need to be super quick (ie Desean Jackson), but to beat that with height, hands and route running they just need to be an average basketball player.
Sean Dawkin's size is reason he was Cal's premier receiver on the Citrus Bowl team.
Whatever combination of size, speed, and rout running skill necessary to create separation and allow for sizable YAC.
"There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics." -- (maybe) Benjamin Disraeli, popularized by Mark Twain
My most memorable touchdown catch for Jackson was against Oregon, I believe He caught a short pass on the right sideline, made a slight move that completely disabled the DB, and shot past him like a rocket. Is that too much to ask of our receivers now? (Maybe - one can hope).
Larno said:
My most memorable touchdown catch for Jackson was against Oregon, I believe He caught a short pass on the right sideline, made a slight move that completely disabled the DB, and shot past him like a rocket. Is that too much to ask of our receivers now? (Maybe - one can hope).
I cite that play all the time! Just one of rose little moves that he did so often. Here at 4:53:
You want variety
This part !!!
Ideally you want a mix to create match up issues
Ideally you want a mix to create match up issues
Tell someone you love them and try to have a good day
Interesting, I did think most people preferred taller WRs. Personally, I go the other way. I'd much rather have a smaller, quicker wide receiver that can get open compared to a bigger wide receiver who can't create separation and HAS to win a contested catch. Even in contested catch scenarios, the data shows that taller wide receivers don't perform any better than smaller receivers, and that having good ball skills regardless of size is more important. It just drives me crazy when coaches call the back-corner fade route on a pass from the 5-yard line to their tallest TE or WR, when these routes have a <33% completion percentage.
Of course, you need a balance of these two skills to have a good WR room. Ideally you have some WRs with all of these skills. Still, I think the tall "red-zone-threat" WR is a bit overvalued.
Got most of the data from this article: https://www.theringer.com/2020/4/21/21228958/nfl-draft-2020-wide-receivers-size
Of course, you need a balance of these two skills to have a good WR room. Ideally you have some WRs with all of these skills. Still, I think the tall "red-zone-threat" WR is a bit overvalued.
Got most of the data from this article: https://www.theringer.com/2020/4/21/21228958/nfl-draft-2020-wide-receivers-size
Unit3IdaSproul said:
Interesting, I did think most people preferred taller WRs. Personally, I go the other way. I'd much rather have a smaller, quicker wide receiver that can get open compared to a bigger wide receiver who can't create separation and HAS to win a contested catch. Even in contested catch scenarios, the data shows that taller wide receivers don't perform any better than smaller receivers, and that having good ball skills regardless of size is more important. It just drives me crazy when coaches call the back-corner fade route on a pass from the 5-yard line to their tallest TE or WR, when these routes have a <33% completion percentage.
Of course, you need a balance of these two skills to have a good WR room. Ideally you have some WRs with all of these skills. Still, I think the tall "red-zone-threat" WR is a bit overvalued.
Got most of the data from this article: https://www.theringer.com/2020/4/21/21228958/nfl-draft-2020-wide-receivers-size
I lost count of how many back corner fade route TDs Kenny Lawler had in his Cal career. Whenever Cal had the ball inside the 10 (and often, even inside the 20), all the QB had to do was throw it to the back corner and it was all but guaranteed that Kenny would come down with a TD. He made me a believer in the idea that a tall receiver with excellent hands and good leaping ability is a special weapon.
01Bear said:Unit3IdaSproul said:
Interesting, I did think most people preferred taller WRs. Personally, I go the other way. I'd much rather have a smaller, quicker wide receiver that can get open compared to a bigger wide receiver who can't create separation and HAS to win a contested catch. Even in contested catch scenarios, the data shows that taller wide receivers don't perform any better than smaller receivers, and that having good ball skills regardless of size is more important. It just drives me crazy when coaches call the back-corner fade route on a pass from the 5-yard line to their tallest TE or WR, when these routes have a <33% completion percentage.
Of course, you need a balance of these two skills to have a good WR room. Ideally you have some WRs with all of these skills. Still, I think the tall "red-zone-threat" WR is a bit overvalued.
Got most of the data from this article: https://www.theringer.com/2020/4/21/21228958/nfl-draft-2020-wide-receivers-size
I lost count of how many back corner fade route TDs Kenny Lawler had in his Cal career. Whenever Cal had the ball inside the 10, all the QB had to do was throw it to the back corner and it was all but guaranteed that Kenny would come down with a TD. He made me a believer in the idea that a tall receiver with excellent hands and good leaping ability is a special weapon.
Speaking of Lawler, I just read an article about him this morning. He's leading the CFL in receiving and is the highest paid non-qb in the league.
PtownBear1 said:01Bear said:Unit3IdaSproul said:
Interesting, I did think most people preferred taller WRs. Personally, I go the other way. I'd much rather have a smaller, quicker wide receiver that can get open compared to a bigger wide receiver who can't create separation and HAS to win a contested catch. Even in contested catch scenarios, the data shows that taller wide receivers don't perform any better than smaller receivers, and that having good ball skills regardless of size is more important. It just drives me crazy when coaches call the back-corner fade route on a pass from the 5-yard line to their tallest TE or WR, when these routes have a <33% completion percentage.
Of course, you need a balance of these two skills to have a good WR room. Ideally you have some WRs with all of these skills. Still, I think the tall "red-zone-threat" WR is a bit overvalued.
Got most of the data from this article: https://www.theringer.com/2020/4/21/21228958/nfl-draft-2020-wide-receivers-size
I lost count of how many back corner fade route TDs Kenny Lawler had in his Cal career. Whenever Cal had the ball inside the 10, all the QB had to do was throw it to the back corner and it was all but guaranteed that Kenny would come down with a TD. He made me a believer in the idea that a tall receiver with excellent hands and good leaping ability is a special weapon.
Speaking of Lawler, I just read an article about him this morning. He's leading the CFL in receiving and is the highest paid non-qb in the league.
He was a special player at Cal. I still can't believe no NFL team was willing to add him to a team and put him in a strength and conditioning program to add muscle. I don't remember him ever dropping a ball. Instead he tended to catch everything thrown his way, including balls that I would've sworn were overthrown. Every NFL team can use a receiver with that kind of catch radius and sure hands.
Among the more recent Cal football players, Kenny Lawler was easily one of my favorites (along with Malik McMorris!). I was a little disappointed when he declared early, but understood his decision. What I couldn't understand was the lack of interest from the NFL.
01Bear said:PtownBear1 said:01Bear said:Unit3IdaSproul said:
Interesting, I did think most people preferred taller WRs. Personally, I go the other way. I'd much rather have a smaller, quicker wide receiver that can get open compared to a bigger wide receiver who can't create separation and HAS to win a contested catch. Even in contested catch scenarios, the data shows that taller wide receivers don't perform any better than smaller receivers, and that having good ball skills regardless of size is more important. It just drives me crazy when coaches call the back-corner fade route on a pass from the 5-yard line to their tallest TE or WR, when these routes have a <33% completion percentage.
Of course, you need a balance of these two skills to have a good WR room. Ideally you have some WRs with all of these skills. Still, I think the tall "red-zone-threat" WR is a bit overvalued.
Got most of the data from this article: https://www.theringer.com/2020/4/21/21228958/nfl-draft-2020-wide-receivers-size
I lost count of how many back corner fade route TDs Kenny Lawler had in his Cal career. Whenever Cal had the ball inside the 10, all the QB had to do was throw it to the back corner and it was all but guaranteed that Kenny would come down with a TD. He made me a believer in the idea that a tall receiver with excellent hands and good leaping ability is a special weapon.
Speaking of Lawler, I just read an article about him this morning. He's leading the CFL in receiving and is the highest paid non-qb in the league.
He was a special player at Cal. I still can't believe no NFL team was willing to add him to a team and put him in a strength and conditioning program to add muscle. I don't remember him ever dropping a ball. Instead he tended to catch everything thrown his way, including balls that I would've sworn were overthrown. Every NFL team can use a receiver with that kind of catch radius and sure hands.
Among the more recent Cal football players, Kenny Lawler was easily one of my favorites (along with Malik McMorris!). I was a little disappointed when he declared early, but understood his decision. What I couldn't understand was the lack of interest from the NFL.
Loved our 2014-2016 WRs
Lawler
Harper
Treggs
Rodgers
Anderson
Harris
Davis
Powe
Hansen
Noa
Rivera
Robertson
Wharton
Stoval
Veasy
Singleton
Duncan
Austin
Etc
Was a little shocked when this site proclaimed last year's group to be "the deepest and most talented WR group (he'd) ever seen at Cal."
Joined:
Jul 9, 2017
Posts:
7,307
User Profile
Private Message
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Staff
Kenny Lawler is a wonderful WR with one fatal flaw for the NFL. He really struggles to get off press coverage. Something that he doesn't have to deal with in the CFL.
BearGreg said:
Kenny Lawler is a wonderful WR with one fatal flaw for the NFL. He really struggles to get off press coverage. Something that he doesn't have to deal with in the CFL.
True
Tell someone you love them and try to have a good day
BearGreg said:
Kenny Lawler is a wonderful WR with one fatal flaw for the NFL. He really struggles to get off press coverage. Something that he doesn't have to deal with in the CFL.
In the NFL there is a 5 yard rule which college doesn't have. Wouldn't that help him in the NFL?
dimitrig said:BearGreg said:
Kenny Lawler is a wonderful WR with one fatal flaw for the NFL. He really struggles to get off press coverage. Something that he doesn't have to deal with in the CFL.
In the NFL there is a 5 yard rule which college doesn't have. Wouldn't that help him in the NFL?
He lacked the upper body strength to fight off press coverage
Tell someone you love them and try to have a good day
going4roses said:dimitrig said:BearGreg said:
Kenny Lawler is a wonderful WR with one fatal flaw for the NFL. He really struggles to get off press coverage. Something that he doesn't have to deal with in the CFL.
In the NFL there is a 5 yard rule which college doesn't have. Wouldn't that help him in the NFL?
He lacked the upper body strength to fight off press coverage
https://www.seattletimes.com/sports/seahawks/seahawks-say-cal-receiver-kenny-lawler-has-best-hands-in-nfl-draft/
I'll take an acrobatic receiver every time, regardless of size. Cal has had some great ones in all sizes.Unit3IdaSproul said:
Interesting, I did think most people preferred taller WRs. Personally, I go the other way. I'd much rather have a smaller, quicker wide receiver that can get open compared to a bigger wide receiver who can't create separation and HAS to win a contested catch. Even in contested catch scenarios, the data shows that taller wide receivers don't perform any better than smaller receivers, and that having good ball skills regardless of size is more important. It just drives me crazy when coaches call the back-corner fade route on a pass from the 5-yard line to their tallest TE or WR, when these routes have a <33% completion percentage.
Of course, you need a balance of these two skills to have a good WR room. Ideally you have some WRs with all of these skills. Still, I think the tall "red-zone-threat" WR is a bit overvalued.
Got most of the data from this article: https://www.theringer.com/2020/4/21/21228958/nfl-draft-2020-wide-receivers-size
Lawler and those one handed catches, fades to the corner, along the back of the endzone over the middle...but he really didn't seem to have the big plays the second season, not sure if it was the coverage or what. hope he can keep at it and stay healthy and cross back to the NFL. Was great when my kids had their Tedford/jahvid #4 jersey and he was on the field.
calumnus said:01Bear said:PtownBear1 said:01Bear said:Unit3IdaSproul said:
Interesting, I did think most people preferred taller WRs. Personally, I go the other way. I'd much rather have a smaller, quicker wide receiver that can get open compared to a bigger wide receiver who can't create separation and HAS to win a contested catch. Even in contested catch scenarios, the data shows that taller wide receivers don't perform any better than smaller receivers, and that having good ball skills regardless of size is more important. It just drives me crazy when coaches call the back-corner fade route on a pass from the 5-yard line to their tallest TE or WR, when these routes have a <33% completion percentage.
Of course, you need a balance of these two skills to have a good WR room. Ideally you have some WRs with all of these skills. Still, I think the tall "red-zone-threat" WR is a bit overvalued.
Got most of the data from this article: https://www.theringer.com/2020/4/21/21228958/nfl-draft-2020-wide-receivers-size
I lost count of how many back corner fade route TDs Kenny Lawler had in his Cal career. Whenever Cal had the ball inside the 10, all the QB had to do was throw it to the back corner and it was all but guaranteed that Kenny would come down with a TD. He made me a believer in the idea that a tall receiver with excellent hands and good leaping ability is a special weapon.
Speaking of Lawler, I just read an article about him this morning. He's leading the CFL in receiving and is the highest paid non-qb in the league.
He was a special player at Cal. I still can't believe no NFL team was willing to add him to a team and put him in a strength and conditioning program to add muscle. I don't remember him ever dropping a ball. Instead he tended to catch everything thrown his way, including balls that I would've sworn were overthrown. Every NFL team can use a receiver with that kind of catch radius and sure hands.
Among the more recent Cal football players, Kenny Lawler was easily one of my favorites (along with Malik McMorris!). I was a little disappointed when he declared early, but understood his decision. What I couldn't understand was the lack of interest from the NFL.
Loved our 2014-2016 WRs
Lawler
Harper
Treggs
Rodgers
Anderson
Harris
Davis
Powe
Hansen
Noa
Rivera
Robertson
Wharton
Stoval
Veasy
Singleton
Duncan
Austin
Etc
Was a little shocked when this site proclaimed last year's group to be "the deepest and most talented WR group (he'd) ever seen at Cal."
Typical over-hype
When something or some one is called the "best ever". What is meant is "best in the last 5-10 years".
Featured Stories
See All
Bears Add Former 4 star Wisconsin DE TJ Bollers
by Jim McGill
Bears Add Maryland Portal Tight End Corey Dyches
by Jim McGill
Cal Duo Earns Pac-12 Weekly Honors
by Cal Athletics