23 minutes ago, ToastJenkins said:

DT and S rank before wr for me

S over CB?

9 minutes ago, austinfan said:

How often do you send 3 WRs deep? And even better, how often does that work?

Most pass plays are 3 seconds, that means the WR doesn't get past 20 yards, you want at least one WR who is quick and agile (i.e. screw his 40 time), can shield the ball with his body, and snatch with his hands. Avant made a nice living going one yard past the 3rd down marker, turning around and winning all the battles with DBs.

With teams going to 2 deep looks more and more (see the playoffs) the ability to consistently move the chains will become increasingly important as the deep ball is taken away from offenses - and that means getting open quickly underneath and run blocking by WRs.

Hines Ward ran a 4.55 40, and outplayed 100s of WRs who could beat him in a 40 yard dash.

Same with Isaac Bruce.

Says the guy who quotes 40 times for OL, DL, rbs, and linebackers when Howie brings in one with a good 40.

2 minutes ago, LeanMeanGM said:

I think they are trending to be ahead of DE, if not already ahead to begin with. 

The recent contracts some of these WRs have gotten is why I asked.  Seems like they're being valued as a premiere position nowadays similar to how DEs have been in the past. Not sure they're there yet but absolutely agree that's how it's trending.

40 minutes ago, DEagle7 said:

If you're ranking NFL positions by importance in general, where does WR rank in today's NFL? #4 after QB, OT, DE?

 

8 minutes ago, LeanMeanGM said:

I think they are trending to be ahead of DE, if not already ahead to begin with. 

I struggle with figuring out the value of OL in this era of neutered defenses.  
 

Secondaries have been hand-cuffed the worst.  When defenses do get the better of a top offense these days, IMO, it’s one of 3 reasons:

1.  The offense intrinsically is misfiring and out of sync.  Just having a bad week.

2.  Elite edge rushers disrupting things.

3.  Severely deficient/injured OL allowing the pass rush to destroy their passing game.

That’s the blueprint for stopping a top offense, which revolves around OT/DE.  The blue print for getting that quick strike high scoring offense in the first place is QB/WR.

 

3 minutes ago, DEagle7 said:

The recent contracts some of these WRs have gotten is why I asked.  Seems like they're being valued as a premiere position nowadays similar to how DEs have been in the past. Not sure they're there yet but absolutely agree that's how it's trending.

It’s pretty rare nowadays to have a bad WR class. With the yearly supply of WRs so plentiful, I don’t think it makes sense at this point to put WR over DE. 

23 minutes ago, Outlaw said:

Yes. 

I just like mocking people who think 40 time is the most important thing to a successful WR. It’s like 3rd at best. 

What are your thoughts on Turay?  I think he could be worth signing. What do you think his price tag will be?

2 minutes ago, uncphillyfan said:

What are your thoughts on Turay?  I think he could be worth signing. What do you think his price tag will be?

hes been on my radar as a potential target. Id really like the signing. Young, close to double digit sacks without a full time role. Theres potential there. 

13 minutes ago, DEagle7 said:

S over CB?

Guess it depends on scheme but yes. Safties asked to do more with modern tes wrs and run fits

2 minutes ago, ManuManu said:

It’s pretty rare nowadays to have a bad WR class. With the yearly supply of WRs so plentiful, I don’t think it makes sense at this point to put WR over DE. 

So that’s Howie-ing (overthinking) the question.

Just because the quality of most WR classes is uniformly solid does not make the position less important.  The supply is so plentiful because of the increased emphasis (and therefore increased money) on the position.  All the best athletes are funneling into it.

1 minute ago, eagle45 said:

So that’s Howie-ing (overthinking) the question.

Just because the quality of most WR classes is uniformly solid does not make the position less important.  The supply is so plentiful because of the increased emphasis (and therefore increased money) on the position.  All the best athletes are funneling into it.

I don’t think so. It’s simple supply and demand. There are more good WRs than good DEs. That’s pretty much always been the case. 

4 minutes ago, ManuManu said:

It’s pretty rare nowadays to have a bad WR class. With the yearly supply of WRs so plentiful, I don’t think it makes sense at this point to put WR over DE. 

I think if I was building a team from scratch I would agree that I would want an elite DE over an elite WR.  But looking at it from a pure average yearly salary POV NFL teams are handing out more and more money to WRs.  Hell Adams and Hopkins have a higher average salary than any non QB player outside of TJ Watt.  In general the top EDGE guys still tend to make more than the receivers still, just seems as if that they are objectively trending up when it comes to have teams value them  relative to other positions.

12 minutes ago, ManuManu said:

It’s pretty rare nowadays to have a bad WR class. With the yearly supply of WRs so plentiful. 

And we keep picking the wrong one

5 minutes ago, ManuManu said:

I don’t think so. It’s simple supply and demand. There are more good WRs than good DEs. That’s pretty much always been the case. 

How many good wrs have the eagles had in the last 20 years?

Just now, eagle45 said:

How many good wrs have the eagles had in the last 20 years?

We’ve sucked at drafting/developing WRs. You won’t get any argument from me. That doesn’t mean WR is more valuable than DE. 

3 minutes ago, ManuManu said:

We’ve sucked at drafting/developing WRs. You won’t get any argument from me. That doesn’t mean WR is more valuable than DE. 

This great supply of WRs in every draft hasn't hit Philly yet.  And while our DEs are perennially overhyped and never as dangerous as many anticipate, they are never as much of a liability as our WRs.

I think the discussion is diverging into two separate arguments. In a vacuum, the DE is more valuable. But within the current setup and rules, the WR as a whole is becoming more valuable. It’s a lot harder now to become an elite DE than it is an elite WR.

1 minute ago, eagle45 said:

This great supply of WRs in every draft hasn't hit Philly yet.  And while our DEs are perennially overhyped and never as dangerous as many anticipate, they are never as much of a liability as our WRs.

Probably because our DEs are routinely better than our WRs despite you believing they’re overhyped. 

But I’m not seeing how any of that is pertinent to positional value and roster building. 

1 hour ago, eagle45 said:

Watkins is not too slow.  But he's also not often used.  Getting that big slow WR you want will make Watkins and his vertical game in less utilized.  

You want a big "agile" WR...well, the big WRs with meaningful agility go in the top half of round 1.  I'd love one of those too.  

If you want a sluggish possession WR, that will congest the middle of the field, not open it up.

You must hate Ty Hill.

 

I don’t want a big slow WR, I want a big route runner, who is agile with good hands.  But he doesn’t need to be a burner. A Micheal Thomas type.   I don’t like Ty Hill as a person but his combination of quickness and route running is special. Yes, he is fast but Quez is a 4.35 guy and developing his route running.  Hangs with work ethic guys.

11 minutes ago, eagle45 said:

This great supply of WRs in every draft hasn't hit Philly yet.  And while our DEs are perennially overhyped and never as dangerous as many anticipate, they are never as much of a liability as our WRs.

DeVonta Smith isn’t any good already?

Just now, Alphagrand said:

DeVonta Smith isn’t any good already?

So two 1sts and a 2nd round pick in 3 years with Devonta Smith to show for it reflects a strong supply at the position?

Just now, eagle45 said:

So two 1sts and a 2nd round pick in 3 years with Devonta Smith to show for it reflects a strong supply at the position?

Just because the Eagles have botched the position doesn’t mean there isn’t a strong supply at the position…

I was listening to an interview with Gil Brandt today and they asked him what he thought about the Browns acquiring Deshaun Watson.  The first thing he defaulted to was how difficult it is to throw the football in the elements in CLE and how important a strong armed QB is.  A bit later he alluded to Baker Mayfield not having a strong throwing arm.

Gil’s been around the game longer than I’ve been alive, but if he thinks Watson has a stronger arm than Mayfield he’s flat-out wrong.  That was the knock on Watson coming out; his throwing velocity.  Might be something to watch for in Cleveland 

2 minutes ago, eagle45 said:

So two 1sts and a 2nd round pick in 3 years with Devonta Smith to show for it reflects a strong supply at the position?

You said they haven’t hit yet.  I wasn’t happy about having to throw in the 3rd round pick to get Smith, but he’s objectively been a hit so far.

1 minute ago, Alphagrand said:

DeVonta Smith isn’t any good already?

It’s crazy with Devonta. People will cite his 917 yards as underwhelming. But most people recognize that our QB missed reads where he was open down field A LOT. He missed him in the end zone A LOT. He missed him open on intermediate routes A LOT as he’d run from a clean pocket for 3 yards. 
 

Just the throws where he missed him wide open when actually targeting him would have netted him an extra couple hundred yards And a few TDs. But if you take into account all the times he never even saw him or looked his way.... If Devonta had even decent (throwing) QB play last season, he would have been top 5 or 7 in yards. But he didn’t. So his numbers are underwhelming. But I just don’t see how any objective person can say that’s his fault 

DeVonta is stuck between a rock and a hard place. His numbers as a top 10 pick are somewhat underwhelming. But a lot is probably due to circumstance.