Taking CeeDee Lamb the argument to take a wide receiver

Wilmot 1

Newbie
Joined
Mar 24, 2020
Posts
12
Reaction score
11
Location
Vero Beach, FL
Or I could have called it ‘do we have this whole draft thing wrong!’

With dick all going on a couple of nights ago I pulled out some of the old game tapes of this year’s top OL prospects. In particular, I wanted to re-watch Alabama’s Jedrick Wills, who upon further review is indeed a really nice player. Smooth, solid technique, good body control, better quickness than his split time would suggest, excellent awareness, powerful punch. Pretty much the whole package. However, as I watched the Tide tapes, what kept jumping out at was that while the Alabama OL was very good, what made that offense dynamic, and it is very dynamic, was their track team at WR. They just put two guys out on each flank with one going deep and the other running a slant and wherever the safety on that side of the field went they threw to the other guy. The other teams never could match up and you started seeing 6-7 yard slants turned into 60-70 yard TDs on a regular basis as even in the games they lost, the Tide was putting up 40-plus points and likely would have at least made the CFP playoffs if Tua Tagovailoa hadn’t been injured.

Then there’s national champion LSU which was regularly putting 500-plus yards and 50 or more points on the board all season long with a team that featured a great QB throwing to another track team of WRs. LSU, of course, went on to win the national championship this past January defeating Clemson, the other real current power in college football, with a team led by a terrific QB throwing to – wait for it – a track team of WRs. Not to mention, the KC Chiefs who just won this year’s Super Bowl with the NFL’s best QB throwing to arguably the league’s deepest – and fastest – receiver corps. And it occurred to me as I was thinking of this stuff that maybe everyone should be thinking about drafting a track team of receivers.

Which is NOT the point of the piece. What also occurred to me is that while the Chiefs are Super Bowl champs, it is not because they have the fewest holes in their roster, but because they have the arguably NFL’s most dynamic individual unit. And when thinking about the really good teams around the league what one tends to see is that they all have a great QB and almost all have at least one really good unit that they essentially win games with. Obviously, with the Chiefs it is their receiver corps, while it was the defensive line for the 49ers. For others, like Seattle and the Seahawks old ‘legion of boom’ it was the defensive backfield. And so on. As such, it occurred to me that one could make a pretty good case that at the draft rather than attempting to fill holes one should really be thinking in terms of building and maintaining the unit or units that the team want to win with. Of course, teams are still going to want to address areas of weakness, especially any that literally do make winning difficult if not impossible.

The other part of the equation here is that the notion of ‘building through the draft’ really is an antiquated concept. It certainly had relevance before the advent of free agency when you had a player for the duration of his career. In that era you could talk about the proverbial 10-year starter and look elsewhere. With free agency, though, even if you draft well, it is going to cost you an arm and a leg to resign your guys after 4-5 years when their rookie contracts expire. The reality in today’s NFL is that teams are constantly turning their rosters every pretty much every 5 years or so whether they are technically rebuilding or not. In that sense, it is –hopefully – easier to maintain one elite unit, rather than trying to fill holes right across the roster. Of course, you aren’t going to draft just WRs or DEs. You are going to take good players at other positions when they are available; you probably will also want to over-draft ‘other’ positions in later rounds.

An article in the GBN report, strengthen the receiving unit. Also with Fitz probably retiring and I don't expect the Cards picking this high next year.
 

WhyAlwaysMe

ASFN Lifer
BANNED BY MODERATORS
Joined
Mar 30, 2020
Posts
3,037
Reaction score
1,306
Location
Earth
Watched the Bama-Mich condensed bowl game last night, and Wills looked like absolute trash. Made me want lamb or jeudy bad.
 

Jetstream Green

Kool Aid with a touch of vodka
Joined
Feb 5, 2003
Posts
29,461
Reaction score
16,603
Location
San Antonio, Texas
Lamb is a Niner if he makes it to them from what I am hearing. Again, I can totally see people looking at the team now and saying we have more than enough firepower at WR but I see the future scenario and would much rather us have Lamb than a division rival. Hopkins is in his prime which gives us maybe three years of dominance from him, Fitz could retire at anytime, Kirk flashes and then gets hurt, Isabella and Butler along with Johnson are a wait and see but none of those guys are bringing what Lamb does initially. I think it comes down to who do you think takes the least amount of time to develop, a WR or OT, and this is looking through the length of our QB's progression. I would not call Lamb or Jeudy generational players or any of these OTs. I do think that Young is one and Simmons might be one on defense
 

az jam

ASFN Icon
Joined
Mar 6, 2004
Posts
12,963
Reaction score
5,147
Location
Scottsdale, AZ
Good stuff, Wilmot 1. You build a nice case for the Cards to draft a wr at #8. It sure would give them an explosive offense.
 

az jam

ASFN Icon
Joined
Mar 6, 2004
Posts
12,963
Reaction score
5,147
Location
Scottsdale, AZ
Amazing that I can be "talked" into the Cards draft a WR or an OT or even one of the top defensive players at #8. Bottom line is that there are lots of good options and I like everyone else on the board am clueless on who the Cards will really take. :shrug:
 
Last edited:

JeffGollin

ASFN Icon
Joined
May 14, 2002
Posts
20,472
Reaction score
3,056
Location
Holmdel, NJ
Nut Cutter: Will the addition of Lamb truly give us a superhuman passing attack? If so, gotta take him. If not, go in a different direction.
 

az jam

ASFN Icon
Joined
Mar 6, 2004
Posts
12,963
Reaction score
5,147
Location
Scottsdale, AZ
Nut Cutter: Will the addition of Lamb truly give us a superhuman passing attack? If so, gotta take him. If not, go in a different direction.


Bottom line, Jeff, it really comes down to who is still on the board when the Cards pick.
 

DevonCardsFan

Registered User
BANNED BY MODERATORS
Joined
May 13, 2002
Posts
5,819
Reaction score
802
Location
Your Mamas
Cards ran 3 or 4 Wrs primarily last year, the addition of Lamb would force defenses to adjust and give Cards favorable match ups, Murray spreads the targets around very nicely as well.

You couldn't have a LB line up on Fitz , Kirk or Lamb, forcing defenses to stay in nickle and dimes defenses, Hopkins, Fitz, Lamb and Kirk would force teams to not stack the box and be blitzed, if they did there could be hell to pay.

The Cards would have a arsenal on offense Murray could dink and dunk on them all day, with all the match up nightmares caused by a squad of killer wide outs
 
Last edited:

Solar7

Go Suns
Joined
May 18, 2002
Posts
11,117
Reaction score
11,949
Location
Las Vegas, NV
Cards ran 3 or 4 Wrs primarily last year, the addition of Lamb would force defenses to adjust and give Cards favorable match ups, Murray spreads the targets around very nicely as well.

You couldn't have a LB line up on Fitz , Kirk or Lamb, forcing defenses to stay in nickle and dimes defenses, Hopkins, Fitz, Lamb and Kirk would force teams to not stack the box and be blitzed, if they did there could be hell to pay.

The Cards would have a arsenal on offense Murray could dink and dunk on then all day, with match up nightmares with a squad of killer wide outs
Yeah, assuming pressure isn't on him immediately, or he doesn't have to throw the ball more than the rest of the NFL because other teams' running games are dictating the tempo of our offense.
 

Carolinacacti

Hall of Famer
Joined
Mar 11, 2007
Posts
2,232
Reaction score
1,213
Location
Charlotte NC
Cards ran 3 or 4 Wrs primarily last year, the addition of Lamb would force defenses to adjust and give Cards favorable match ups, Murray spreads the targets around very nicely as well.

You couldn't have a LB line up on Fitz , Kirk or Lamb, forcing defenses to stay in nickle and dimes defenses, Hopkins, Fitz, Lamb and Kirk would force teams to not stack the box and be blitzed, if they did there could be hell to pay.

The Cards would have a arsenal on offense Murray could dink and dunk on then all day, with match up nightmares with a squad of killer wide outs
You have to mention Drake coming out of the back field also
 

Garthshort

ASFN Addict
Joined
Aug 11, 2002
Posts
9,205
Reaction score
5,236
Location
Scarsdale, NY
It would be nice to get a WR, but it wouldn't make this year's team much better. That is why we have to go BPA at #8, we'll take either Brown or Thomas in the first, assuming that they are still available when we pick. If we trade back I guess we could consider a WR, even though an OT or DT makes more sense. Much more.
 

CFLredzoned

Hall of Famer
Joined
Sep 28, 2011
Posts
1,636
Reaction score
1,172
Location
Melbourne, FL
Lamb is a Niner if he makes it to them from what I am hearing. Again, I can totally see people looking at the team now and saying we have more than enough firepower at WR but I see the future scenario and would much rather us have Lamb than a division rival. Hopkins is in his prime which gives us maybe three years of dominance from him, Fitz could retire at anytime, Kirk flashes and then gets hurt, Isabella and Butler along with Johnson are a wait and see but none of those guys are bringing what Lamb does initially. I think it comes down to who do you think takes the least amount of time to develop, a WR or OT, and this is looking through the length of our QB's progression. I would not call Lamb or Jeudy generational players or any of these OTs. I do think that Young is one and Simmons might be one on defense

That's a really good point. It's easy to get micro focused on looking at things only from the Cardinals perspective and what their needs are. Things can start to get murky after you've been doing it for two months. But if you simply flip the script and ask youself which guys would you be most afraid of your rivals getting hold of, all of a sudden it becomes much less murky. If Lamb or someone like Simmons are those guys, doesn't that make them BPA?
 

BritCard

ASFN Icon
Joined
Jan 10, 2020
Posts
21,332
Reaction score
37,831
Location
UK
Lamb is a Niner if he makes it to them from what I am hearing. Again, I can totally see people looking at the team now and saying we have more than enough firepower at WR but I see the future scenario and would much rather us have Lamb than a division rival. Hopkins is in his prime which gives us maybe three years of dominance from him, Fitz could retire at anytime, Kirk flashes and then gets hurt, Isabella and Butler along with Johnson are a wait and see but none of those guys are bringing what Lamb does initially. I think it comes down to who do you think takes the least amount of time to develop, a WR or OT, and this is looking through the length of our QB's progression. I would not call Lamb or Jeudy generational players or any of these OTs. I do think that Young is one and Simmons might be one on defense

You don't draft to stop another team. That would be some of the dumbest draft strategy ever. If we drafted with that philosophy we would have taken Bosa instead of Murray. Bosa will inflict much more hurt on us than 60 yards from CeeDee.
 

GuernseyCard

ASFN Icon
Joined
Dec 29, 2012
Posts
10,123
Reaction score
5,681
Location
London UK
You don't draft to stop another team. That would be some of the dumbest draft strategy ever. If we drafted with that philosophy we would have taken Bosa instead of Murray. Bosa will inflict much more hurt on us than 60 yards from CeeDee.

Well, he was neutralized by DJ last season.

Let's see how the Niners do against Hopkins, CeeDee, Fitz and Kirk.
 

BritCard

ASFN Icon
Joined
Jan 10, 2020
Posts
21,332
Reaction score
37,831
Location
UK
Well, he was neutralized by DJ last season.

Let's see how the Niners do against Hopkins, CeeDee, Fitz and Kirk.

This is just getting sad now. It's getting to the point people will say anything to convince themselves CeeDee is still an option.

FYI, he wasn't neutralized by DJ. Bosa beat him a bunch of times. We just got the ball out so quickly (and ran it a bunch) so as to try neutralize their rush.

Nevertheless. A top tier edge rusher will always be more valuable than a WR so the idea that we would draft CeeDee just to possibly keep him from the Niners (even though there are several WR needy teams above the Niners) is just preposterous.

We're drafting him because he played with Murray
We're drafting him because Kyler wants him
We're drafting him to stop the Niners getting him

It's sad. Let's ignore the actual facts like he isn't even the best WR in the class. That his skill set replicates the guy we just traded for when there are 2 options that give us something different and that we just traded for a WR1 using our 2nd.
 

GuernseyCard

ASFN Icon
Joined
Dec 29, 2012
Posts
10,123
Reaction score
5,681
Location
London UK
This is just getting sad now. It's getting to the point people will say anything to convince themselves CeeDee is still an option.

FYI, he wasn't neutralized by DJ. Bosa beat him a bunch of times. We just got the ball out so quickly (and ran it a bunch) so as to try neutralize their rush.

Nevertheless. A top tier edge rusher will always be more valuable than a WR so the idea that we would draft CeeDee just to possibly keep him from the Niners (even though there are several WR needy teams above the Niners) is just preposterous.

We're drafting him because he played with Murray
We're drafting him because Kyler wants him
We're drafting him to stop the Niners getting him

It's sad. Let's ignore the actual facts like he isn't even the best WR in the class. That his skill set replicates the guy we just traded for when there are 2 options that give us something different and that we just traded for a WR1 using our 2nd.

What's truly sad is your refusal to recognize that CeeDee is actually an option at #8.

Two WO's with superb, similar skill sets, how terrible!
 

Harry

ASFN Consultant and Senior Writer
Joined
Jan 7, 2003
Posts
10,866
Reaction score
23,314
Location
Orlando, FL
This is just getting sad now. It's getting to the point people will say anything to convince themselves CeeDee is still an option.

FYI, he wasn't neutralized by DJ. Bosa beat him a bunch of times. We just got the ball out so quickly (and ran it a bunch) so as to try neutralize their rush.

Nevertheless. A top tier edge rusher will always be more valuable than a WR so the idea that we would draft CeeDee just to possibly keep him from the Niners (even though there are several WR needy teams above the Niners) is just preposterous.

We're drafting him because he played with Murray
We're drafting him because Kyler wants him
We're drafting him to stop the Niners getting him

It's sad. Let's ignore the actual facts like he isn't even the best WR in the class. That his skill set replicates the guy we just traded for when there are 2 options that give us something different and that we just traded for a WR1 using our 2nd.
I’m not worried about the Niners. Saying it’s preposterous that that rapport with Murray is a major asset that I’ve yet to see any established talent evaluator allege, even the ones preferring other options.

Also saying he isn’t the best receiver is an assertion without substantiation. Of course it also totally ignores fit. Yes Ruggs would better spread the field vertically, but I believe that only comes into play on a few patterns. The same could be said of Jeudy, route running is more valuable on pasterns that take more time to develop. Lamb is also a fine route runner who’s much superiors to the other two on 50-50 balls. That’s huge. To me this offense is filled with patterns that seek to confuse the defense horizontally. Getting these defensive guys turned around allows for significant YAC and for the running game to break lose once they get threw the line. The best YAC guy is clearly Lamb. BTW, Hopkins is not a monster YAC guy, he ranked only 11th among the WRs last season. He and Lamb do not have the same skill set. Again that’s just an assertion.

https://www.playerprofiler.com/nfl/deandre-hopkins/
 

DVontel

ASFN Icon
Joined
Jan 28, 2015
Posts
12,536
Reaction score
21,647
I’m not worried about the Niners. Saying it’s preposterous that that rapport with Murray is a major asset that I’ve yet to see any established talent evaluator allege, even the ones preferring other options.

Also saying he isn’t the best receiver is an assertion without substantiation. Of course it also totally ignores fit. Yes Ruggs would better spread the field vertically, but I believe that only comes into play on a few patterns. The same could be said of Jeudy, route running is more valuable on pasterns that take more time to develop. Lamb is also a fine route runner who’s much superiors to the other two on 50-50 balls. That’s huge. To me this offense is filled with patterns that seek to confuse the defense horizontally. Getting these defensive guys turned around allows for significant YAC and for the running game to break lose once they get threw the line. The best YAC guy is clearly Lamb. BTW, Hopkins is not a monster YAC guy, he ranked only 11th among the WRs last season. He and Lamb do not have the same skill set. Again that’s just an assertion.

https://www.playerprofiler.com/nfl/deandre-hopkins/
I believe Lamb being the best “YAC guy” is a beneficiary of playing against soft Big 12 defenses.


YAC against NFL defenses, I think Ruggs presents more problems.
 
Top