Should we trade DK?

[RiverDog]

I'm reluctant to get ahead of myself over Smith-Njigba and Bobo until they both actually emerge. I like what I'm seeing, but a few games of production from them doesn't make Metcalf expendable. He's also not untouchable either. I'm more concerned about his propensity for penalties than I am paying for his production. The dime a dozen argument suggests, in my opinion, that there are enough adequately talented WRs available in later rounds to get enough production the field. This a true to an extent; it depends a lot on the OC and the QB, but there's still top tier prospects who have attributes that just can't be taught. I say that to convey that I don't have a problem avoiding using high-round picks for WRs, but I fine with drafting a guy that looks like a top-tier talent in the early rounds. And, yes, there's some late round success stories like Kupp that over perform, but that is hardly representative of what a team can expect drafting all their WRs in the later rounds. Seattle has churned through a lot of late round guys. Baldwin and Lockett are the two late round success stories to their name. Bobo could be the next one. That's potentially 3 since 2011.

To answer the original question, I can go either way on it. If someone wants to give up the farm for him then jump on it. If the price isn't right, let him play out his contract and reassess at the end of it.

Kupp was drafted high in the 3rd round, the 69th overall, so I wouldn't call that a late round selection.

But there are lots of gems at the WR position in the late rounds, more, it seems, than other positions. The Rams got Puka Nacua in the 5th round this season, and he's already the 3rd leading receiver in the league with 58 receptions and over 750 yards. FYI neither Baldwin nor Kearse were drafted. Both were UFDA's.

Just for fun, here are the current top 5 receivers and their draft position:

1. Tyreek Hill, 5th round
2. AJ Brown, 2nd round
3. Puka Nacua, 5th round
4. Stefon Diggs, 5th round
5. DJ Moore, 2nd round

3 of the top 4 are 5th round selections. I wonder how that compares to other positions.

[MackStrongIsMyHero]

I always assumed he was a later round dude. So where is the line for drafting a WR too high?

I don't know when or if I'll take the time to do it, but I'd like to see what the spread of success has looked like at the WR position over the years based draft position. Teams need 5-6 on the active roster and 2-3 on the PS, so it's one of the most numerous of the positions drafted. It would be nice to know which round(s) the most success comes from if it even bears that out.

[RiverDog]

I always assumed he was a later round dude. So where is the line for drafting a WR too high?

I don't know when or if I'll take the time to do it, but I'd like to see what the spread of success has looked like at the WR position over the years based draft position. Teams need 5-6 on the active roster and 2-3 on the PS, so it's one of the most numerous of the positions drafted. It would be nice to know which round(s) the most success comes from if it even bears that out.

Yeah, my example was far from being scientific. I was shocked to see that Tyreek Hill was just a 5th round pick.

Like you, I'd like to see some sort of study done on the success rate of wide receivers relative to their draft slotting and compare those results with other positions. But in the absence of any kind of empirical evidence, it sure seems to me like there's a lot of lower round wide receivers that are making significant contributions to their teams.

[RiverDog]

Oh, yeah, and let's not forget about Dee Eskridge.

[4XPIPS]

Should Detroit have traded Calvin Johnson after his first 4 years over a few extra penalties? I know you guys don't like to talk "Hall of Fame worthy" but a direct comparison of Megatron to DK over their first 4 years put him on exactly that kind of pace:

DK Metcalf: 306 rec (499 targets, 61.3% catch rate), 4218 yards, 35 TDs
Megatron: 270 rec (517 targets, 52.2% catch rate), 4191 yards, 33 TDs

And you guys wanna give up on him now? Sorry but it's just silly.

What is silly is you are willing to ignore poor sportsmanship and lack of accountability for production.

[Aseahawkfan]

I don't think you can judge WRs by their draft status and expect similar results. WR is one of the NFL positions requiring a large number of players. Each team has 4 to 5 or more WRs. That is a total of 128 or more WRs in the league. Each team needs at least two to three quality receivers. So the position is extremely competitive. You'll usually have a mix of WRs from different draft rounds because it's hard to fill out your WR group with all high round picks. Given the volume of players at this position, it will have quite a few high performers from different rounds of the draft. You'll still find your highest performers early on and likely high first round picks. How important is a WR for winning Super Bowls? Not really sure. We've had great dynasties from back in the day with 1st round WRs like Jerry Rice, Michael Irvin, and Lynn Swann.

Peyton won a Super Bowl with Marvin Harrison and Reggie Wayne. Both First round picks.

Brady won many Super Bowls with a whole cast of low draft pick receivers like Wes Welker and Julian Edelman. Though he did have his absolute best season with Randy Moss as his main WR.

I don't really see a huge correlation between the draft status of a WR and winning SBs one way or the other. You know you want good WRs so your QB has good tools to throw to. As with every position, it's easier to find quality players in higher rounds.

I think with a QB like Geno Smith who isn't much of a creator or a guy who elevates his receivers, you need good receivers. If we had an Aaron Rodgers or prime Russ, then we would have an easier time getting by with lower quality WRs. Prime Russ almost won a Super Bowl with Baldwin and some guy we signed off the streets. Great QBs can make lower quality receivers look better. But a good group of WRs can make weaker QBs like Geno look better than they are.

I imagine the quality of your QB would be one of the first considerations as to how much you should invest in your WRs. Though a QB with power in the organization like Peyton Manning is almost going to demand resources be spent on quality WRs.

[RiverDog]

I don't think you can judge WRs by their draft status and expect similar results. WR is one of the NFL positions requiring a large number of players. Each team has 4 to 5 or more WRs. That is a total of 128 or more WRs in the league. Each team needs at least two to three quality receivers. So the position is extremely competitive. You'll usually have a mix of WRs from different draft rounds because it's hard to fill out your WR group with all high round picks. Given the volume of players at this position, it will have quite a few high performers from different rounds of the draft. You'll still find your highest performers early on and likely high first round picks. How important is a WR for winning Super Bowls? Not really sure. We've had great dynasties from back in the day with 1st round WRs like Jerry Rice, Michael Irvin, and Lynn Swann.

Peyton won a Super Bowl with Marvin Harrison and Reggie Wayne. Both First round picks.

Brady won many Super Bowls with a whole cast of low draft pick receivers like Wes Welker and Julian Edelman. Though he did have his absolute best season with Randy Moss as his main WR.

I don't really see a huge correlation between the draft status of a WR and winning SBs one way or the other. You know you want good WRs so your QB has good tools to throw to. As with every position, it's easier to find quality players in higher rounds.

I think with a QB like Geno Smith who isn't much of a creator or a guy who elevates his receivers, you need good receivers. If we had an Aaron Rodgers or prime Russ, then we would have an easier time getting by with lower quality WRs. Prime Russ almost won a Super Bowl with Baldwin and some guy we signed off the streets. Great QBs can make lower quality receivers look better. But a good group of WRs can make weaker QBs like Geno look better than they are.

I imagine the quality of your QB would be one of the first considerations as to how much you should invest in your WRs. Though a QB with power in the organization like Peyton Manning is almost going to demand resources be spent on quality WRs.

Lynn Swann? He last played over 40 years ago. The game has changed a bit since then.

Wide receivers aren't the largest position group on the team. We have just as many if not more guards, tackles, cornerbacks, and linebackers as we do wide receivers.

And yes, obviously a good wide receiver can make an average QB look like a HOF'er. So can a good offensive line. But the question isn't whether or not a WR is "good", the question is where are these "good" WR's coming from? Tyreek Hill is arguably the best WR in the game, and he was a 5th round pick.

I'm just throwing it out there, that it sure seems to me like there are more WR's taken in the later rounds that have success than there is at other positions. Is the fact that 3 of the top 4 currently ranked WR's are 5th round draft picks just a coincidence? Am I somehow cherry picking to support my assertation? I'm not saying that I'm absolutely right, more like it's a hunch.

[Aseahawkfan]

The number of CBs is to deal with the number of WRs. WRs and CBs are two of the larger position groups on the team to offset each other. Lots of CBs are taken in later rounds too because that position group is hard to fill out with just high picks.

Any receiver group is likely a mix of picks taken at different rounds. Normally your higher performers will still be found more often in the higher rounds. We've seen tons of receivers picked in later rounds in Seattle that did nothing and never developed next to the guys that did develop.

Any intelligent GM is always going to take their opportunities to grab guys they think can develop into starting or decent depth WRs. The rounds when taken will vary depending on availability of value at a given draft point.

There is no point trying to claim there is some strategy of using lower round picks on WRs when you can't even be sure the high round picks will work out. You take a variety of WRs with traits and qualities you want that have good draft value where they're available in the draft, then take them and develop them.

I don't view the WR position any differently than any other position. If you get a chance at at stud like DK, you take it. His value was good as a second round pick IMO. He was the 64th overall pick. We've gotten great production out of him.

But at the moment we need O-line more than a great WR. Now we're down of our best outside linebacker/D-line guys. That is going to suck.

[RiverDog]

The number of CBs is to deal with the number of WRs. WRs and CBs are two of the larger position groups on the team to offset each other. Lots of CBs are taken in later rounds too because that position group is hard to fill out with just high picks.

Any receiver group is likely a mix of picks taken at different rounds. Normally your higher performers will still be found more often in the higher rounds. We've seen tons of receivers picked in later rounds in Seattle that did nothing and never developed next to the guys that did develop.

Any intelligent GM is always going to take their opportunities to grab guys they think can develop into starting or decent depth WRs. The rounds when taken will vary depending on availability of value at a given draft point.

There is no point trying to claim there is some strategy of using lower round picks on WRs when you can't even be sure the high round picks will work out. You take a variety of WRs with traits and qualities you want that have good draft value where they're available in the draft, then take them and develop them.

I don't view the WR position any differently than any other position. If you get a chance at at stud like DK, you take it. His value was good as a second round pick IMO. He was the 64th overall pick. We've gotten great production out of him.

But at the moment we need O-line more than a great WR. Now we're down of our best outside linebacker/D-line guys. That is going to suck.

Taking Metcalf late in the 2nd round was a brilliant decision and a great value pick, especially at that particular time, in 2019, when we could use another WR and when we had a lot of draft capital with 11 selections in that draft. That's never been my beef. It's when we follow it up with multiple high round draft picks, ie Eskridge in 2021 and JSN in 2023. Eskridge in particular was a bad decision as he was our first overall pick and we had just three selections, a 4th and a 6th in addition to the 2nd, when we had other glaring needs. When you don't have a 1st or 3rd round pick and just 3 selections overall, that 2nd round pick is like gold.

[NorthHawk]

The College game is the reason the WRs are better equipped to make it in the NFL these days, with their wide open systems and much less focus on the run game.
So there will be more NFL ready WRs. However, the very best still rise to the top for the most part but every year there are some exceptions. But it happens at all positions to a degree, so it's really about scheme fit and if you look
at Nacua, he fits what McVay does, but he might not be effective (or as effective) in a different Offense.

[Aseahawkfan]

Taking Metcalf late in the 2nd round was a brilliant decision and a great value pick, especially at that particular time, in 2019, when we could use another WR and when we had a lot of draft capital with 11 selections in that draft. That's never been my beef. It's when we follow it up with multiple high round draft picks, ie Eskridge in 2021 and JSN in 2023. Eskridge in particular was a bad decision as he was our first overall pick and we had just three selections, a 4th and a 6th in addition to the 2nd, when we had other glaring needs. When you don't have a 1st or 3rd round pick and just 3 selections overall, that 2nd round pick is like gold.

You know why that happened. The mistake in that situation was taken before we took Eskridge with the trades that left us with 3 picks. That sucked.

[RiverDog]

Taking Metcalf late in the 2nd round was a brilliant decision and a great value pick, especially at that particular time, in 2019, when we could use another WR and when we had a lot of draft capital with 11 selections in that draft. That's never been my beef. It's when we follow it up with multiple high round draft picks, ie Eskridge in 2021 and JSN in 2023. Eskridge in particular was a bad decision as he was our first overall pick and we had just three selections, a 4th and a 6th in addition to the 2nd, when we had other glaring needs. When you don't have a 1st or 3rd round pick and just 3 selections overall, that 2nd round pick is like gold.

You know why that happened. The mistake in that situation was taken before we took Eskridge with the trades that left us with 3 picks. That sucked.

That's certainly the cause of being so short of draft picks. But given that predicament we were in, IMO it was foolish to devote such a rare commodity as one of just three picks, and the top pick at that, to a wide receiver when we had other areas of need.

[Aseahawkfan]

That's certainly the cause of being so short of draft picks. But given that predicament we were in, IMO it was foolish to devote such a rare commodity as one of just three picks, and the top pick at that, to a wide receiver when we had other areas of need.

Certainly didn't help that Eskridge is a clear bust at this point.