Upon Further Review - Michael Crabtree Not an Elite Prospect

Sorry to burst Mel Kiper's bubble but Michael Crabtree is not a top NFL prospect. Top NFL WR prospects have tremendous size, speed and have demonstrated how to use those athletic attributes in college to make you believe they will dominate in the faster, bigger, tougher NFL.
Michael Crabtree in my estimation has demonstrated none of the above criteria to warrant such admiration and in my estimation is on route to becoming an infamous NFL bust.
I read a favorable comparison of Michael Crabtree to Calvin Johnson. Well to prove my point, let’s just compare Crabtree’s measurables to Calvin Johnson’s along with other recent highly touted NFL prospects:
Calvin Johnson - Height: 6-5, 4.35 sec 40 yard dash, 45" vertical jump
Braylon Edwards - Height 6-3, 4.40 sec 40 yard dash, 38" vertical jump
Larry Fitzgerald - Height 6-3, 4.48 sec 40 yard dash, 35" vertical jump
Michael Crabtree - Height 6-1 3/4, 4.54 sec 40 yard dash*, 34" vertical jump*
* College reported measurements
The first measurement (and only official measurement) to jump out about Crabtree is his height. He is not a tall receiver of the likes Johnson, Edwards or Fitzgerald. In fact, he's not tall at all for a receiver of NFL standards.
Judging by his lack of height you have to question whether Crabtree can win the vertical battle in the NFL. In fact, what often differentiates the top NFL receivers from the rest is the ability to win the jump ball from the defender. At 6-1 Crabtree is already at a disadvantage to the receivers mentioned.
We lack a vertical leap measurement on Crabtree because of his injury prior to the combine so we're just left checking the tape. I looked at the tape. Not only could I not find evidence of superior on field leaping ability but saw he often failed to attack the ball at the highest point. In traffic, he had a penchant for diving backwards for the ball to make the catch. It proved effective in college, but NFL defenders are not going to misjudge the flight of the ball giving him the chance to complete the catch behind them. Anyone expecting Larry Fitzgerald's high acrobatics or Megatron’s never ending reach isn’t going to see that play from Michael Crabtree.
No. 1 NFL receivers who lack height often make it up with superior speed. I think I've pretty well proven Crabtree won't be a Calvin Johnson or Braylon Edwards but maybe he's of the Santana Moss, Steve Smith mold of top receivers with blazing speed. Checking the combine numbers Santana Moss ran 4.35 40 yard dash and Steve Smith ran a 4.38. I haven't read anyone outside the Lubbock cheerleader squad who thinks Crabtree runs below 4.5 sec 40 yard dash. Again, you can refer to the tape but it's often pointed out Crabtree faced inferior talent provided by Texas Tech's schedule. Yes, he looks fast but he isn't out running anyone to make you believe he is 4.35 fast.
If he doesn't have superior size or superior speed than he really is a low-end NFL deep threat or even worse an NFL slot receiver. Neither comparison makes him a viable top 10 NFL prospect. Drafting him that high would put him in the reach category of a Peter Warrick, albeit Crabtree is taller. Than again, top slot receivers are precise route runners. Crabtree needs a lot work in that area.
Yes, but he's a football player and winner . . .
No denying Michael Crabtree was a great college football player and Texas Tech achieved a greater fame with him. However, if you go back to his most famous play, the game winner against Texas, the play was more of a mistake by the Texas safety than a great play by Crabtree. You can see the CB intentionally shadowing Crabtree to attack the ball underneath but it was safety that blew the coverage by also attacking the ball underneath instead of staying behind the play to make the safe tackle. Crabtree made the mistake of running the route 6 yards short of the end zone and the safety let him off the hook.
The abilities that do translate to the NFL are Crabtree’s great hands; ability to shake off arm tackles and good open field running, but that doesn't make him a special NFL prospect. As Reggie Bush found out, open field running in the NFL can be a rare commodity. Also to use those hands Crabtree will need to become a better, more deceptive route runner and display the ability to body the defender from the ball at the point of attack.
What about the immeasurables? No doubt Crabtree is a good kid who was a pleasure for the coaching staff, teammates and the campus. He is no knucklehead or malcontent but I question whether his college experience has prepared him for the culture shock of the NFL. I also question whether he is a workaholic, which is needed to survive in the NFL.
How many of you know that Mike Leach likes to keep the size of his play book exorbitantly low in order to give his kids more time for class? In 2 years at Texas Tech Crabtree had to learn a total of 35 plays. Let me repeat . . .35 PLAYS! Every high school football team in the country has a more elaborate play book. I have to believe such a minuscule playbook makes college life easy and the game more fun. Now project Crabtree's having to hunker down and memorize a 300 play NFL playbook with route trees based on secondary reads before he even enters training camp. He has the smarts but does he have the will or experience to break down and absorb that kind of playbook?
The NFL is a professional football league. The best players are known for their work ethic far above their athleticism . . . except you Randy Moss. Does Crabtree have the will to put in those extra, grueling hours to make him great? Minus exceptional height and speed, Crabtree is going to need to out work his counterparts to meet expectations.
More than likely, I expect to hear complaints that Crabtree doesn't find the NFL brand of football fun anymore. The extra hours of practice and study just to find mild success will probably wear on his expectations where he's always found that the game came easy. It cannot be emphasized enough; the greats are married to their job. Is Crabtree married to the grueling task of being an NFL football player or has the gotten by with athletic talent? Jeremy Maclin is told to be a great worker, is Crabtree of that mold?
Let it be declared now. If Michael Crabtree turns out to be NFL draft bust you heard it here first. Behind those rosy colored glasses painted on by the college football hype machine there are some serious questions to Crabtree's NFL prospects. Great college players don't always make great NFL players. 6-1 height, 4.5 sec 40 yard dash isn’t special in the NFL and his fundamentals and work ethic are not his strengths.
As for Mel Kiper, just know his list annually consists of the top college football players who might be big or fast enough for the NFL ranks, but its mere coincidence if they measure out to be top prospects by NFL standards. I wonder how many NFL scouts have secretly admitted to friends and family that they would punch Mel Kiper if given the opportunity? Lucky for Mel, if Crabtree busts the fan base stuck with the disaster would have already forgotten his prediction.
This is a FanPost and does not necessarily reflect the views of Niners Nation's writers or editors. It does reflect the views of this particular fan though, which is as important as the views of Niners Nation's writers or editors.
135 comments
|
7 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
ummmm.
Did that seriously convince you? How can that convince anyone of anything? He compared a rookie to some bigger but could have done the same with smaller guys. Compared to Wes Welker, he’s HUGE! and he’s not blazing fast so that makes him NOT a playmaker. You know that guy Anquan Boldin? He’s slow too, but last I checked, he balls better than 97% of the rest of the league. I’m excited about this pick because the kid is a straight up PLAYMAKER. Watch the film. Dude knows where the endzone is and he gets there! I don’t care if he caught 18 passes next year, just as long as they’re all touchdowns. We need ballers and this kid was one of the best in college against some VERY good competition. That winner vs Texas was CLUTCH!
Great article
I’m not sure I agree with everything here, but you definately raise good points for those people who are praying the NINERZZ BRAZZ gets Crabtree at any cost.
The playbook portion in particular peaked my interest, as well as the statement,
More than likely, I expect to hear complaints that Crabtree doesn’t find the NFL brand of football fun anymore.
He could be similar to Vince Young, in the fact that he finds the NFL life much more overwhelming than what he experienced at the college level.
Personally, the talent, breakaway speed and god-given hands still makes me want Crabtree, but I think after this I’m not going to be too upset if/when he gets picked before #10.
Blind devotion.
by ProfessorBigelow on Apr 10, 2009 5:35 AM PDT reply actions
purely speculative
to say he won’t find the NFL brand fun is dumb. dumb.
Vince Young is a QB, who had the extreme amount of pressure on his shoulders of being a high draft choice to play the most important, under the microscope position in the league.
And if you’ve looked at a Tech playbook and haven’t been overwhelmed, I doubt the NFL’s “scary” playbook won’t phase you.
by Andrew Davidson on Apr 10, 2009 7:20 AM PDT up reply actions
+1
As a Tech Alum, there is some bias, but I think people tend to overlook the talent and attribute it to Leach’s system. I am glad that the Dolphins/Patriots gave Welker a chance and I looking forward to Crabtree being able to prove himself in the NFL.
by VigilanteSteve on Apr 12, 2009 10:06 PM PDT up reply actions
Welker is fast?
If we’re following bignerd’s argument here, I don’t believe Welker ran a 4.4ish 40 at all. If anything, I think he was significantly slower.
+1
I disagree with the main argument of this post, and a lot of the comments here are just dumb. It’s kind of pathetic how easy it is for people to read simple comparative stat sheets and say, “oh wow, you’re right.”
There are stats and measurements that can be used to accurately determine how good of an NFL receiver a guy is/will be – and to be honest, I don’t think height, 40 time or vertical leap are among them.
Exactly.
Unless the WR runs a ridiculously slow (4.6 or 4.7), I think the more important statistic for WRs (in terms of speed and such) is their acceleration times (shuttle and such) and ability to create separation. Honestly, what difference is a 4.45 from a 4.53 over 15 yards? Not even one fifth a yard, which approximately works out to almost a WHOLE two and a half inches.
Two and a half inches....
…. is a step? Please.
Crabtree made the mistake of running the route 6 yards short of the end zone and the safety let him off the hook.
You clearly know nothing about how Tech’s offense works, nor the situation at hand when that play was run. With eight seconds and one timeout left, all the offense needed was field goal position, and that was effectively an out-route.
6-1 height, 4.5 sec 40 yard dash isn’t special in the NFL and his fundamentals and work ethic are not his strengths.
Tell Steve Largent and, more recently, Wes Welker about the importance of size and speed. Jerry Rice was 6’2", effectively the same as Crabtree. And maybe you’ve got inside information that nobody else in the world has, but I think you’re just being an idiot by saying his fundamentals and work ethic are not strengths. Crabtree has been a receiver for a whole three years, and in that time he became the best at his level. The fact that he played most of the 2008 season with a stress fracture in his foot (including The Catch), and still wanted to run the 40 at his pro-day, just shows how little you know what you’re writing about.
About the only way this entry could be more off-base is if you said the 49ers would ever win another Super Bowl.
After all is said and done, more is said than done.
by ayleein on Apr 10, 2009 6:44 AM PDT reply actions 1 recs
Thanks, I couldn’t find his time, but was pretty sure it wasn’t blazing.
After all is said and done, more is said than done.
And:
Not only could I not find evidence of superior on field leaping ability but saw he often failed to attack the ball at the highest point.
That couldn’t possibly be because Graham Harrell was one of the most accurate passers in college, and the routes they ran were practiced to precision over, and over, and over, and over, and over, and over, and over again, could it? Oh, silly me, of course not — Michael Crabtree doesn’t have the work ethic.
After all is said and done, more is said than done.
Whatever
Its constructive to shed some criticism on the top rated WR in this year’s draft, but it would be absurd not to take him at 10 if he drops.
So he doesn’t have a blazing 40 time, did Jerry? Not to say Crab is going to come remotely close to Jerry, but keep in mind, work out numbers don’t often prove everything.
As Reggie Bush found out, open field running in the NFL can be a rare commodity.
As Reggie Bush found out, he is a running back, not a wide receiver. Sometimes, and get this, sometimes WRs catch the ball in the open field. Really? They do? If you’ve followed Tech as closely as I have over the past 10 years, you would know, that no Tech receiver has come close to doing what Crab has done in two seasons. The system is stat friendly, but Crab put up video game numbers. He has YAC ability, can make the catch in the clutch, and can make people miss.
the play was more of a mistake by the Texas safety than a great play by Crabtree.
I don’t know if you watched that game, and I assume you didn’t based on that comment. The Red Raiders were down by 1, nearing FG range. All they need was a FG to seal the deal. Crab caught the ball on a designed route at the 6 – it was probably Harrell best throw all year – and would’ve stepped out of bounds, but both defenders whiffed. While it was lucky to get the TD, and that yes, the defenders screwed up, doesn’t mean Crab’s abilities should be questioned.
Crabtree has never had attitude issues, work ethic issues, or any character issues what so ever. To assume he will in the NFL is based on nothing, and purely Florio-esque speculation.
Having said all of this, if Crab is a bust, you definitely will get props, but you aren’t the first to say it either. And thanks for pissing me off so damn early. lol
by Andrew Davidson on Apr 10, 2009 7:17 AM PDT reply actions
Hey
if it sounds like I’m sitting on a high perch here, because “I’ve followed Tech closely for 10 years”, please don’t interpet that. I just meant that in the 10 years I’ve been a fan of tech, no WR has put up Crab’s numbers.
by Andrew Davidson on Apr 10, 2009 7:23 AM PDT up reply actions
love the adjective
“Florio-esque” — the best coinage I’ve heard (particularly for that kind of speculation) since I heard “ass-snappingly cold” as a description for the winter weather in Winnipeg, MB.
Throwback unis? Yes. Throwback afros? YES!
I've never been to Winnepeg
for that very reason.
by Andrew Davidson on Apr 10, 2009 3:28 PM PDT up reply actions
Crabtree
His desire is his greatest asset!!! I have never met anyone else like michael, with the love and desire for the game of football!
I just exploded a little.
My Dave Righetti is better than your Dave Righetti.
by howtheyscored on Apr 10, 2009 6:38 PM PDT up reply actions
Sounds like Scott Rowand.
Rafael Rodriguez: Your number 8 organizational prospect before stepping a foot on American soil and has "looked just super so far," according to Felipe Alou. "He has some bat speed and the ball comes off the bat pretty well" - K.Law.
by BrianBokake on Apr 18, 2009 11:31 AM PDT up reply actions
Top NFL WR prospects have tremendous size, speed and have demonstrated how to use those athletic attributes in college to make you believe they will dominate in the faster, bigger, tougher NFL.
Jerry Rice didn’t have tremendous size or speed. Put your tape measure and stop watch down, watch some football and maybe you’ll learn something, but probably not.
Don't sweat it. I'm illiterate.
I question whether you've done any research
besides looking up a persons measurables. You tell us that “we’re just left checking the tape” but you provide no links to this alleged tape. I watched every televised game Michael Crabtree played in College, and my conclusions are all the exact opposite of yours. A few examples:
Not only could I not find evidence of superior on field leaping ability but saw he often failed to attack the ball at the highest point.
I watched the tape. After reviewing the tape I found evidence of superior on field leaping ability and saw how often he attacked the ball at its highest point.
Than again, top slot receivers are precise route runners. Crabtree needs a lot work in that area.
Michael Crabtree is one of the best route runners in College Football, which tells me he will be a great route runner in Professional Football. He finds space incredibly well.
Crabtree made the mistake of running the route 6 yards short of the end zone and the safety let him off the hook.
The play is called Six (for how many points it scorse), with four verticals. Per Graham Harrell: “throwing it behind [the receiver]… we practice that 10 times a day. There’s no telling how many times we’ve run that play throwing it behind on Crab’s back shoulder. He has such great body control he’s one of the best in the country at making that catch.”
The “mistake” is that Michael Crabtree ran a route, looked back to his quarterback who had already made the decision (one they had practiced) to throw the ball to his back shoulder, because that’s what you do when the cornerback isn’t looking. If Crabtree takes the route to the endzone 1) Texas Tech has to kick an uncertain FG to win the game 2) he’s run the wrong route. At Texas Tech you are expected to adjust your routes.
At every level of football, it helps when a receiver can adjust to a ball in the air.
Also to use those hands Crabtree will need to become a better, more deceptive route runner and display the ability to body the defender from the ball at the point of attack.
It sounds to me like you’re just falling into the trap of using a bunch of buzz words to make it seem like you’ve got information you don’t have. Whatever it is you mean by “deceptive route runner” it’s probably the case that Michael Crabtree has it. He reads defenses as well as any wide receiver in CFB (it might help that he’s a former quarterback) and has the ability, required of all Tech receivers, to adjust his route to the coverage. In goal line situations he was extremely good, even in our conference schedule, at using his body to keep the defender away from the ball. I can think of a pair of catches against Oklahoma State where he kept the cornerback off the ball with his body. We can talk about The Catch, where he’s demonstrating excellent body control, getting his hands on a contested ball by keeping the cornerback away with his body.
I also question whether he is a workaholic, which is needed to survive in the NFL.
It sounds like your basis for this is the size of Mike Leach’s playbook, but whether someone is a workaholic and whether they have a large playbook are two very, very different things. His High School coach called him a workaholic. After his record breaking freshman season, he spent most of the following summer working out with Graham Harrell on his own time. Quote:
Crabtree said he and Harrell spent their afternoons running 10-yard routes up and down the field at Jones AT&T Stadium, stopping near the end zone for three consecutive plays from the goal line. Down and back, down and back they went – without any water.
That same summer he went to Deion Sanders’ WR camp at SMU and word was he already has beaten high caliber NFL defenders.
Every high school football team in the country has a more elaborate play book. I have to believe such a minuscule playbook makes college life easy and the game more fun. Now project Crabtree’s having to hunker down and memorize a 300 play NFL playbook with route trees based on secondary reads before he even enters training camp. He has the smarts but does he have the will or experience to break down and absorb that kind of playbook?
Well in that case, he already mastered a larger playbook than he did at Texas Tech, since he was the quarterback at Dallas-Carter before becoming a Red Raider. Combined with his intense work ethic, I have little doubt that Michael Crabtree’s knowledge of football, that has been greatly bolstered by spending seasons with Mike Leach, will be enough for him to overcome the apparently daunting hurdle that has been leapt by many very talented, but not necessarily intelligent, NFL wide receivers before him. Texas Tech’s alleged dumbed down playbook is the smartest in CFB. And Michael Crabtree mastered it.
The best players are known for their work ethic far above their athleticism . . . except you Randy Moss. Does Crabtree have the will to put in those extra, grueling hours to make him great? Minus exceptional height and speed, Crabtree is going to need to out work his counterparts to meet expectations.
Well the evidence is overwhelmingly: Yes! that’s what makes Crabtree so lovable. As you pointed out, he isn’t the tallest or the fastest person in any room. But there’s a better than not chance he’s the one who gives a shit the most, who shows up to practice the most, who flat out tries harder than anyone else. He did that all last year despite being injured virtually every game. He didn’t go from being a HS quarterback to being one of the most prolific WRs in CFB history because he was lazy or lacked a willingness to work hard.
More than likely, I expect to hear complaints that Crabtree doesn’t find the NFL brand of football fun anymore. The extra hours of practice and study just to find mild success will probably wear on his expectations where he’s always found that the game came easy. It cannot be emphasized enough; the greats are married to their job. Is Crabtree married to the grueling task of being an NFL football player or has the gotten by with athletic talent? Jeremy Maclin is told to be a great worker, is Crabtree of that mold?
What’s up with these questions? Have you done any research on the subject you’re discussing? Are these supposed to be rhetorically suggestive or are you genuinely uncertain of the answer? If the former, what is your basis? Does the tape you’ve apparently poured over (HAH!) tell you that he lacks work ethic? If you are genuinely uncertain, why are you waiting until the end of the post to evidence to the world your total lack of knowledge on Michael Crabtree? You don’t have to follow Texas Tech football to know that Michael Crabtree is a hard worker; all you need is Google.
I am disappointed in this post.
by Skin Patrol on Apr 10, 2009 9:25 AM PDT reply actions 1 recs
he was the quarterback at Dallas-Carter before becoming a Red Raider
Really? If that’s true, it’s amazing how well he runs with the ball considering he was a HS QB before reaching college.
Also...
… to add to his work ethic: it seems as though he actively tries to get two feet inbounds when he plays (admittedly, I only see the highlight videos). College still has the one foot rule, right? So actively trying to get two feet down shows, in my opinion, he’s willing to work harder to show that he’s capable of doing similar stuff when he reaches the next level.
yep
practicing for the future.
CFB does have the one foot rule
Other than death and taxes, only 4 things in this world are indisputable:
Brandon Roy is the BEST player in the NBA in the clutch.
Montana to Rice were the greatest to ever play the game.
The Four Horsemen of Maddux, Smoltz, Glavine and Avery were unstoppable.
No one protects the pipes like Luongo.
by GreatOden'sRaven on Apr 10, 2009 5:06 PM PDT up reply actions
I like that reply
Nice work Skin Patrol.
by Andrew Davidson on Apr 10, 2009 3:30 PM PDT up reply actions
I like it
Skin Patrol, wanna bet who’s better next year, Shaun Hill or Jason Campbell.
Don't sweat it. I'm illiterate.
by methodrampage on Apr 13, 2009 4:18 PM PDT up reply actions
I did that on this site
between Campbell and Alex Smith and, although I didn’t win (it was a wash) I believe it would have been had I insisted on plausible terms.
But you do not need to ask me this question; I am a partisan, through and through, and the best QB in the NFL next season will be the quarterback of the Washington Redskins, which is my answer every year, unless Mark Brunell returns.
I was very impressed with the way Campbell protected the football. I know very little about Shaun Hill.
The bet was with me
Smith blew his shoulder out that year, had he stayed healthy I would have lost. BTW, I don’t want to take the bet but I know there are some on here that think Hill is the 2nd coming.
Don't sweat it. I'm illiterate.
by methodrampage on Apr 14, 2009 9:00 AM PDT up reply actions
hill
You mean you don’t think he is? You’re going to burn for that one!
by David Fucillo on Apr 14, 2009 9:05 AM PDT up reply actions
Wow
Based on your “expert” breakdown of NFL combine numbers, similar thinking would put the following players above Michael Crabtree in terms of likely NFL success:
Abilene Christian WR Johnny Knox
Rutgers WR Tiquan Underwood
Stephen F. Austin WR Dominique Edison
Mississippi WR Mike Wallace
Penn State WR Deon Butler
OK… now back to the real world where you actually have to GET OPEN AND CATCH PASSES!
Q: You question Crabtree’s work ethic and ability to prepare in the NFL?
Answer: He’s already worked with NFL hall-of-famers for the last 3-4 years to become the best WR in college and has continued to work with these all-time greats (Deion Sanders, Michael Irvin, Jerry Rice, etc.) on his game leading to the draft.
Q: You bring up his 40yd time as evidence of his potential success in the NFL?
Answer: He’s a possession receiver! Check the film and look at his route running, hands, ability to release from press coverage, adjustments to poorly thrown passes, and ability to shed tackles with upper body strength. He grades out as elite in nearly all of those categories, which are key factors for transitioning into the NFL. Check the top 40 times from the NFL combine over the last 3-4 years and you’ll see a who’s who list of NFL busts and nobodies. Personally, I’d love to see his 10yd split and short shuttle time far more than the 40yd dash time (the most overrated measurable).
In college, Crabtree was in a scheme where the goal was to spread the field so you can’t completely judge his 1-on-1 ability on film. What you can do is project his body and skills and I see a future 100 reception, 1,000 yard receiver who simply gets the job done. Being an NFL receiver is not all about the flashy catch over two defenders or 9 route down the sideline blowing past the DB. There have been plenty of receivers who made an All-Pro career out of being great fundamentally at their position with above-average athleticism and natural instincts (Jerry Rice, Jimmy Smith, Isaac Bruce, and Cris Carter immediately come to mind… more recently Reggie Wayne, Anquan Boldin, Derrick Mason, and T.J. Houshmanzadeh).
Rays in '08.... Desmond Jennings - the breakout continues.....
Crabtree
While this certainly a detailed report, I disagree with your conclusions. I am curious what you have to say in response to Skin Patrol and/or youALREADYknow.
The Video Evidence:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jPz7caPqoJE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BCr7tW79njg&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9aJZsjImymc&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fm9gAYutAwg&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=esaP9SO5100&feature=related
etc…
Wes Welker can't be stopped.
At 4:11, 3rd video
if that isn’t a “display [of] the ability to body the defender from the ball at the point of attack” then nothing is.
by Skin Patrol on Apr 10, 2009 10:02 AM PDT up reply actions
Bottom Line
Nice work on the article… but the bottom line is that we need a go to WR! Crabtree is a proven athlete, leader, and a darn good football player. He is like Fitzgerald in a way because he understands the game and the defense. I think he’s got talent that far outweighs anyone we have in our roster… including Morgan, Bruce, or Jones. If he falls on our lap I say take him. I’ll tell you what can we expect a guy like Jones to be our next Jerry Rice or even John Taylor??? Give the fans some excitment and the offense a boost! For God-sake don’t draft another Balmer in the first round! Give this offense a facelift and lets get CRABTREE!
Isn't it unfair to compare Crabtree to Fitzgerald and Johnson?
To say that Crabtree is not a prospect by comparing him to these two, to me, is plain stupid. They are both complete freaks of nature. If you had to be as big and fast as Fitzgerald or Calvin Johnson to be in the NFL, we might never see another WR drafted ever again.
Indeed ...
It’s unfair to compare any prospect to the best players in the league at their position.
Michael Crabtree will be a successful pick, going #7-#10, if he’s an above-average NFL starter. Hey, it’s great to get a superstar, but it’s really hard to tell who’s going to be a superstar by looking at what they did in college. There’s always a lot of guesswork involved.
If I really was convinced that Crabtree was the second coming of Randy Moss, I might be more excited about drafting him, but I always try to be more realistic about my assessment of players who haven’t shown they can make the adjustment to the bigs just yet.
So to me, the question with a draft pick in this range is “which starter, replaced by an above-average player at his position, will result in the biggest improvement in the team?” For the Niners, I think WR is pretty low on that list.
You say....
… it’s unfair to compare a prospect to the best players in the league at their position, but then you go and make Randy Moss out to be a comparison, sort of.
It’s not only unfair to compare a prospect to the best players at the position, but it’s also unfair to compare a prospect to players who hold a completely different skillset. Moss, Fitz, and Johnson all have a different skill set from Crabtree. Crabtree is a lot closer to Anquan Boldin, IMO, than Fitz.
Also, your question at the end is this: the only positions that tend to make an immediate impact (i.e. better than the current starters) are offensive linemen and running backs. Every other position typically has a larger (and sometimes much larger) growth period. In this case, though, I disagree that Crabtree won’t improve the 49ers significantly. I’m pretty certain he’ll produce more than Morgan or Hill this season. The difference in that production will be far more useful to Shaun Hill than the difference between Oher/A.Smith and M.Smith/B.Sims/A.Snyder at RT. Also, at least for the first year, the difference will also likely be greater than that of Orakpo/Brown/Sintim over Haralson/Lawson/Whomever.
Im confused...
In your imaginary kingdom where you are king, and the the only inhabitant of siad world, your agruement might be valid. But on earth, in the year 2009 your post reminds me of reading the report of a first grader writing about nuclear engineering, completely ridiculous and non factual. Granted you did get his height right so i’ll give you props there. I dont know if you have ever played WR or football for that matter, but as a WR you need to find holes in a defense even if that means changing your route. A QB can be as acurrate as humanly possible, but if a WR cant find space your QB is worthless. Crabtree is the best college player i have ever seen at doing just that. As others have said before me, it doesn’t matter if a WR has blazing speed, superior height or size. We’ve heard the successes of undersized WR’s and slower WR’s, but the failures of those with the attributes you speak of outweigh the successes. For every Calvin Johnson there is a Mike Williams, Charles Rogers, Dante Stallworth, David Terrell. TO does not have blazing speed and drops 25% of the balls that hit his hands but he is considered one of the all time greats. So I suggest you have some football knowledge before you try and criticize a prospect, Mel has been doing this for years, how about you?
P.S. I hope you aren’t from Sacramento cause this meaningless gibrish you are spouting gives the 916 a bad name.
I found this interesting. I go down the the comments and it is a warzone. But I can say is that Crabtree probably won’t make it down to 10. All bignerd did was state his analyze of crabtree. However you shouldn’t be mad because stated his point and had some evidence. Whether you agree with the evidence or not should be debated not angrily breaking down his point and essentially calling him a fool. And if Crabtree does become the next Jerry Rice than he will be wrong. But if you are wrong and he becomes a huge bust, I don’t think you guys will feel that great about yourselfs
What evidence?
And who is mad?
It’s the easiest thing in the world to state authoritatively things that are demonstrably false. The issue here is that there’s a post, it proports to speak authoritatively on a player (in a personal sense, too, because it somehow finds a way to question a) Crabtree’s love of the game and b) his work ethic without providing any bases for these opinions) but doesn’t appear capable of doing so.
I do not think it is a big deal, I do not think anyone is angry here, but whatever treatment the author gets is a direct result of the content produced.
Crabtree at #10
You’re right, Crabtree probably won’t make it to #10. If he makes it past #7, another team may look to trade up to get him. I hope the 49ers aren’t one of those teams (even though I really like Crabtree).
However, at #10, I’d rather take a shot at someone Crabtree, who can make plays for his team, rather than take an offensive tackle who will be resigned to playing RT (at least for the first year, but maybe even beyond). I’d also rather take a shot at Crabtree rather than take a sack artist who is projecting to a new position.
If Crabtree fails, then I would have at least failed trying to bring in a player that MANY regard as not only a fairly safe pick, but also one who’s shown the world that he’s a playmaker who wants to be good. A right tackle, while safe, probably won’t help out a team as much as a #1 WR who can help control the clock with possession routes (which Crabtree excels at).
Bignerd...
I will try to say this as respectfully as I can, but you are a complete and utter dumbass. I think you just wrote this post to get people to comment on it. I would be shocked if anyone had this many negatives to say about Crabtree and truly believed them, and you also have pulled a lot of what you said in this post out of your ass. You say Crab isn’t a hard worker…what in God’s green earth would make you say that? You don’t know the guy, and you obviously don’t read about him because you would know he is one of the hardest workers to ever play for Tech. At least you seem to be achieving your goal, a lot of people are commenting on here.
I know...
…. other people have ridden him pretty hard in this post. But contrary to what’s going on in most forums and such, calling someone a dumbass shouldn’t be an acceptable part of ANY comment, no matter how much you disagree. Just post you disagree and why, and leave the character (or other personal) attacks off the comment.
by sfgfan on Apr 10, 2009 1:55 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
+1
Other than death and taxes, only 4 things in this world are indisputable:
Brandon Roy is the BEST player in the NBA in the clutch.
Montana to Rice were the greatest to ever play the game.
The Four Horsemen of Maddux, Smoltz, Glavine and Avery were unstoppable.
No one protects the pipes like Luongo.
by GreatOden'sRaven on Apr 10, 2009 5:07 PM PDT up reply actions
Yeah, that's not cool.
Thoughtful critique is sincere flattery. Insults only insult the one issuing the insult.
Throwback unis? Yes. Throwback afros? YES!
This is why I appreciate methodrampage’s mode of engagement in conversation here even though it annoys me—or rather it annoys the aspect of me that thinks I can get off with lazy or underdeveloped arguments.
Throwback unis? Yes. Throwback afros? YES!
Your right
Bignerd, I apologize. Though I disagree with you, that gives me no excuse to act that way. I respect your opinion.
Your right
Bignerd, I apologize. Though I disagree with you, that gives me no excuse to act that way. I respect your opinion.
Also
I love how suddenly you are an insider VIP to Tech football and you just happen to know that Crabtree ran the wrong route against Texas. That statement right there makes you lose any credibility. That throw and catch was practiced and executed perfectly, and Tech practices that play daily.
I’m glad that while berating him for saying something he couldn’t possibly know, you happen to mention a supposed practice routine that you likely couldn’t know yourself.
My Dave Righetti is better than your Dave Righetti.
by howtheyscored on Apr 10, 2009 6:43 PM PDT up reply actions
I attend
Texas Tech football practices on a regular basis, though I still dont believe that makes me an insider. I do, however, think I have more inside information than bignerd
Fair enough.
My Dave Righetti is better than your Dave Righetti.
by howtheyscored on Apr 11, 2009 11:10 PM PDT up reply actions
Comment
This is part in response to the “warzone” comment, as well as some of the other stuff.
Aside from a couple comments, I actually think this has been “relatively” civilized given the topic. For the NN readers not aware, the folks at Double T Nation (our Texas Tech blog) posted a link to this, which has brought some of the Red Raider fans out of the woodwork here.
While some people have been rough on bignerd, most folks have backed their comments up with solid evidence and support. When you make a FanPost like this, you also have to expect serious rebuttal. I disagree with most of what bignerd said about Crabtree and it’s just time to take his medicine (unless he can provide sound counter-arguments). However, as sfgfan said, calling him a dumbass does not add value to the argument. Otherwise, I think things could have gone a lot worse in here.
I knew this wouldn't be popular but here are some of my responses . . .
1st Measurements:
Consensus Top 10 drafted NFL WR have great size or great speed and sometimes both. Crabtree has neither. He is not a physical specimen of Calvin Johnson or Larry Fitzgerald but most fans are under the impression that he is. It’s fair to compare him to these receivers because that’s the current expectation. To be that type of receiver he needs to out leap defenders for contested balls and be able to hit the home run pass. If he is not great, than the bust word is going to get thrown at him.
He is still a 1st round selection. Based on his measurements he would grade out around the 15th-25th overall pick. He’s a tweener with enough physical gifts to be a Pro Bowl player but he’s going to have to be a workaholic because he can’t physically overpower the defense with size or speed alone. If he marries himself to the game he will be Laveranues Coles, Hines Ward or maybe even reach a Cris Carter type player. Without the great work ethic, he would be a average NFL WR.
Comparison to other receivers:
Wes Welker – wasn’t viewed as a top overall pick and the team that drafts Crabtree isn’t expecting him to play in the slot for such a high pick.
Jerry Rice – drafted mid first round . . . that’s where I assess Crabtree’s real draft value
Work Ethic . . . it’s a guess!
Admit, it’s a great unknown. Essentially it’s a guess on my part but I base it off:
- Texas Tech offense isn’t complex (it’s as close to street ball in a professional setting as it gets). It’s going to be a culture shock coming to the NFL.
- His route running isn’t deceptive or sharp. Pretty much all college receivers have that problem. However, without blazing speed or superior size you need good route running in the NFL to succeed. Catching the 5 yard curl against the Unv of Rice calibur DB standing 8 yards back isn’t going to work anymore.
- He doesn’t always body out defenders. Yes, it could be Tech’s offense strategy that was pointed out above. Several highlights have the DB just missing the ball over his shoulder or missing the flight of the ball. An extra step in or outside would have shielded out the defender from even having a chance at the ball. Again, NFL defenders won’t miss knocking the ball down like they often did in college.
- He doesn’t attack the ball at the highest point. Just YouTube it.
- The last three items were fundamentals, fundamentals, fundamentals which needs to be his entire NFL game. Has he spent the time working on these things in college? I’m just asking the question. Did they fail to emphasis these atTech’s practices? Did he get away with these flaws because of his great hands and superior athleticism?
- Expectations: He’s already hurt. He can’t out jump nor out run people in the NFL. I’ve pointed out the fundamental issues he needs to work on. The pressure put on him by the Mel Kipers are going to be intense. I’m betting on percentages and saying it’s not going to be fun for a while. He doesn’t yet have a track record of overcoming a football challenge. He starred his 1st day in college and outside looking in it’s as though things have come easy. I’m expecting a period of self doubt, how will he respond? It’s not a fair argument. It’s like blaming an 18 year old for not having a credit score but I want to ask it.
Texas TD . . .
I didn’t say he ran the wrong route. I’m simply stating the TD results was more a complete bonehead mistake by the Texas safety than a mind boggling play by Michael. He showed great hands again snatching the ball from the defender who correctly played the underneath route. However, he doesn’t waltz into the end zone if the safety doesn’t blow his assignment.
If I missed anything let me know
Yes, he could shrug it all off and come out guns blazing. Than again that would really make him special. Still, Crabtree is being portrayed as this great, great prospect to likes of prior high NFL WR draft prospects. His measurements suggest otherwise. If the guy is going to flat out work people in the NFL than yes he will live up to expectations. If doesn’t I don’t see the physical tools that will allow him to skate by. If I’m picking Crabtree that high I want to see the work ethic. Reports said Jerry Rice showed it in college. Jeremy Maclin’s teammates talk about his. Maybe Texas Tech needs to do some better PR because I haven’t heard the stories yet.
Same thing...
You’re speaking authoritatively on subjects you aren’t an authority on.
He is not a physical specimen of Calvin Johnson or Larry Fitzgerald but most fans are under the impression that he is.
Do you have some poll that shows America believes Crabtree is bigger or faster than Calvin Johnson and Larry Fitzgerald?
He is still a 1st round selection. Based on his measurements he would grade out around the 15th-25th overall pick.
If your opinion is that someone who is Michael Crabtree’s size, with Michael Crabtree’s verticle, and Michael Crabtree’s 40 time is incapable of being selected in the top 10, just state that and leave all the extraneous bullshit out. If you want to impress people with your ability to google a kid’s height, do that and then walk away from questioning his work ethic, or his love of the game. That’s just nonsense you add on (in the face of overwhelming evidenec to the contrary) that’s supposed to bolster your “opinion” which is simply: People smaller than Larry Fitzgerald and Calvin Johnson cannot be selected with the first 10 picks in an NFL draft.
Jerry Rice – drafted mid first round . . . that’s where I assess Crabtree’s real draft value
The point people are trying to make is that the half of the league that didn’t draft Jerry Rice when they had the chance are still kicking themselves for that massive error in judgment.
His route running isn’t deceptive or sharp. Pretty much all college receivers have that problem. However, without blazing speed or superior size you need good route running in the NFL to succeed. Catching the 5 yard curl against the Unv of Rice calibur DB standing 8 yards back isn’t going to work anymore.
What evidence do you have that his “route running isn’t deceptive of sharp”? People can watch his film, they don’t need you to do that for them. He runs very sharp routes, and he deceives receivers. Have you seen Tech ever run a 5 yard curl? Why don’t you just go watch his highlights and report back what % of the passes he caught were 5 yard curls.
He doesn’t attack the ball at the highest point. Just YouTube it.
This is just buzz word nonsense. Attack the ball at its highest point? Why is he attacking the ball? Is it an invasion? Why is the highest point the ideal spot? If a QB throws a hail mary, should they catch the ball at the moment it starts its descent towards the eath, when it is 30 feet in the air? What is it you are TRYING to say with this attacking of the ball at its highest point. One of the big pluses frequently piled on Crabtree is that he uses his hands to catch the ball. That’s what people mean when they say “attack the ball” because that keeps it out of the DBs hands. It’s not about getting a catch at some height certain.
By the way, here’s what an NFL player said of Michael Crabtree, at a camp where he watched him play:
The NFL players say Crabtree showed them a few things too. “Man, he’s a helluva player,” says Omar Stoutmire, an 11-year NFL vet. “The way he goes up and fights for the ball—you won’t find many receivers who can do it like that. I saw him make three catches against some of the best cornerbacks in the NFL. That’s all about attitude.”
emphasis NOT added
The last three items were fundamentals, fundamentals, fundamentals which needs to be his entire NFL game. Has he spent the time working on these things in college? I’m just asking the question. Did they fail to emphasis these atTech’s practices? Did he get away with these flaws because of his great hands and superior athleticism?
Get away with what??? He runs excellent routes, frequently confusing defenders. He muscles opposing defenders away from the ball, as evidenced in all the youtube videos posted earlier in this thread (see third video, 4:11, that’s against Texas, not Rice). He catches the ball with his large, strong hands and he aggressively moves to where it is going, which is why he had more catches than any other freshman DI-A player in history. All the things you think he doesn’t have… he does. The only piece of evidence that you presented originally that he couldn’t run routes was the Texas game, and we’ve already demonstrated you were wrong.
I’ve pointed out the fundamental issues he needs to work on.
No, you’ve STATED BUT UNSUPPORTED fundamental issues you think he has. Unless and until you can support those statements, why is the burden of proof on the rest of us to talk Crabtree up? Did you or he win the Biletnikoff? If the entire world is predicting Michael Crabtree to go in the top 10, why should we have to dissuade you that the world is wrong, as opposed to the other way around? What “tape” did you watch to reach these ridiculous conclusions?
Instead of us just talking past each other, let’s start with some of the evidence. You point us to some play where you think he screwed something up, and we can discuss whether you’re right. Until then it’s just you spouting the same nonsense over and over and us disagreeing with you, which is a waste of both our time.
The pressure put on him by the Mel Kipers are going to be intense. I’m betting on percentages and saying it’s not going to be fun for a while.
I’m sure Michael Crabtree cares what Mel Kiper has to say. Crabtree wouldn’t know anything about the kind of pressure facing a young man in double coverage playing down by six with 8 seconds left against the #1 team in the country in front of the rowdiest home crowd in school history. But sure Mel Kiper is going to get to him.
As for fun… watch Crabtree after the Texas game and tell me he doesn’t look like someone who loves the game. Kid had options; he could’ve played basketball and indeed he was recruited to play basketball. But he chose football exclusively even though it meant he’d have to wait a year to play. Everything that has happened for like the past 8 years of this kids life screams his love of football.
Maybe Texas Tech needs to do some better PR because I haven’t heard the stories yet.
Maybe it’s because you haven’t done any research? Here are articles highlighting Michael Crabtree’s work ethic:
http://foxsports.foxnews.com/nfl/story/8850168/His-biggest-catch-yet
http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=3054736
http://rivals.yahoo.com/ncaa/football/news?slug=jn-crabtree111408&prov=yhoo&type=lgns
http://texastech.scout.com/2/545848.html
http://sports.espn.go.com/espnmag/story?id=3531059
http://collegesportsblog.dallasnews.com/archives/2009/04/crabtree-now-a-teammate-of-jared.html
http://www.usatoday.com/sports/college/football/big12/2007-10-17-texas-tech-crabtree_N.htm
http://www.dallascowboys.com/news/news.cfm?id=90CDBB5D-A291-48BF-6A4075FFBF180A9B
It goes on and on. Each one of those articles highlights his work ethic. If you think “it’s a guess!” you’re alone. It took two minutes to find all those just using Google. If you can’t be botherd to take the time to look up his work ethic, which has been really the crowning achievement of your post, then why bother writing about it? Just say: I don’t like his measurables and therefore I wouldn’t draft him 10th. That’s a fine opinion, a wrong one, probably, but at least defensible. You do yourself no favors by adding in a bunch of supporting information that has the disadvantage of being factually incorrect.
I don’t think you missed anything because I don’t think you hit anything. Frankly I re-read your post and I think you got every single point wrong except for the measurables.
Quotes on Work Ethic
All apply to Michael Crabtree.
http://foxsports.foxnews.com/nfl/story/8850168/His-biggest-catch-yet
“He’s a workaholic and he’s seen what hard work does” – His High School Coach
“With each workout, Crabtree’s intensity increased. His teammates said they could see the difference his efforts were making on the field.
http://rivals.yahoo.com/ncaa/football/news?slug=jn-crabtree111408&prov=yhoo&type=lgns
At times, a few of Crabtree’s teammates even became irritated with him for running through tackles too hard during what many felt was supposed to be a "light" practice.
"He’s the most fierce competitor I’ve ever been around," defensive back Darcel McBath said. "Even when the ball isn’t coming to him, he’s blocking his tail off. He’s trying to drive people out of bounds or into the turf." — Jason King, Yahoo Sports
And when [Crabtree] was in junior high, the two worked out together for three hours several nights a week. “Training like a boxer really worked on Michael’s reflexes,” Wells says. “He worked on his hand-eye coordination and was constantly working with his body, always having to figure out how to counter everything, how to change angles.” – ESPN The Mag, quoting boxing trainer David Wells.
http://collegesportsblog.dallasnews.com/archives/2009/04/crabtree-now-a-teammate-of-jared.html
“Michael made the catch of the year last year, and that along with his unprecedented talent and work ethic on and off the field make him a great choice for the brand.” – Tony Pace, on why they selected Crabtree to endorse Subway.
“Michael Crabtree is like Michael Irvin in terms of work ethic and talent” — Irvin’s former personal assistant.
“Off the field, Crabtree is all about a strong, blue-collar work ethic.” — Jill Lieber Steeg, USA Today
http://www.dallascowboys.com/news/news.cfm?id=90CDBB5D-A291-48BF-6A4075FFBF180A9B
“Texas Tech wide receiver Michael Crabtree’s work ethic helped make him a first-round lock and a millionaire in waiting.” — Rob Phillips, DallasCowboys.com
I don’t think it is common knowledge that Michael Crabtree is a workaholic, but it’s at least widely enough known and accepted so as to be included in any extended commentary on Michael Crabtree. Your original post was just ludicrous; I can blame you for not knowing he works hard, but to conclude that he doesn’t?
You’ve backed off that now, essentially saying we don’t know… well yea we do know. He works hard. He’s worked hard his entire career. And mistakes and backtracking aside, maybe you shouldn’t be questioning the work ethic, from your keyboard, of some kid you’ve never met. Talk about the effects of his size, sure, but why should his work ethic be on-limit when nothing that’s ever been said of the kid gives reason for pause?
I think it is cheap.
You make NO sense
bugnerd stated, “Still, Crabtree is being portrayed as this great, great prospect to likes of prior high NFL WR draft prospects.”
Charles Rogers, Mike Williams, Reggie Williams, David Terrell, Koren Robinson, and Peter Warrick.
Please tell me these are the “great, great prospects” that Crabtree may not live up to.
Crabtree is better now than these guys were at the peaks of their careers. And every one of them was a Top 10 draft pick over the last ten years.
Minor point of contention
I have a problem with this line:
He doesn’t attack the ball at the highest point. Just YouTube it.
The problem I have is that you’re stating your belief, but failing to provide supporting evidence to make your case. Instead, you ask those who disagree to do the work of finding evidence to support your claim. You’re not the only person to do this, bignerd, I’ve seen it done before.
Basically, if you want to state something, essentially saying it’s the truth, it’s on you to provide evidence to support your claim, you shouldn’t leave it up to others to verify it for you.
I'm thinking but nothing's happening.
I tend to believe production
not measurables lead to the best players.
not too often do you see workout warriors become great pros. What you do see, is guys that produced in college produce in the pros.
now if he was 5’6" 115 then maybe. but the figures you listed arent enough to disprove his accomplishments
Other than death and taxes, only 4 things in this world are indisputable:
Brandon Roy is the BEST player in the NBA in the clutch.
Montana to Rice were the greatest to ever play the game.
The Four Horsemen of Maddux, Smoltz, Glavine and Avery were unstoppable.
No one protects the pipes like Luongo.
by GreatOden'sRaven on Apr 10, 2009 5:10 PM PDT reply actions
One day soon I’m going to write an official moratorium fanpost where, among other things, I’ll explain why nobody is every allowed to use Jerry Rice’s speed as evidence that guy being slow somehow isn’t worth condsidering a knock against him.
This is actually not a comment on Crabtree or on his speed. It’s more a comment on the commentary surrounding that discussion.
My Dave Righetti is better than your Dave Righetti.
Or Wes Welker’s size. Or anything else that rightly qualifies as an exception to the rule, for that matter.
My Dave Righetti is better than your Dave Righetti.
by howtheyscored on Apr 10, 2009 6:38 PM PDT up reply actions
Upon further review, I'm convinced this is an intentionally controversial post
with no merit and legitimacy at all.
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
Why?
Are you allergic to talent?
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
by Fearless Frog on Apr 11, 2009 3:27 PM PDT up reply actions
I have no opinion on Crabtree ...
… because I haven’t watched him play enough.
But there is this group of people on the board who seem to ignore any of the possible red flags – the injury, the size and speed concerns, etc.
The truth is there is a pretty solid history of guys who were very good in college, who were undersized and lacked the speed to make up for it, who underperformed in the pros. Now, it’s quite possible that Crabtree is the exception, and that he makes up for it with phenomenal intangibles. His college production is impressive, even when you account for the teams he played against and the pass-wacky system he played in.
But isn’t it appropriate to have a little bit of concern about his ability to take it to the next level? Some draft analyses are suggesting that Britt might end up a better pro. And there’s a tremendous amount of guesswork involved. Peter Warrick, Desmond Howard, Michael Westbrook, and Kenny Jackson were all top-four picks, and none of them Their average year, combined, was something like 25 catches.The NYT, writing in 2006, made the comment that of 19 WR’s drafted since 2002, only one put up a 1000-yard season the previous year.
The notion that Crabtree is a slam-dunk can’t-miss player seems to defy any sort of serious analysis. This doesn’t mean I think he’ll fail, but just … why no caution at all on the part of his supporters?
I don't understand...
… where people get off calling Crabtree undersized. He’s definitely no Randy Moss or anything, but 6’1" (almost 6’2") is very decent size for a WR (especially at 215 pounds).
It’s because No #1 receivers in the NFL are either exceptionally tall 6-3 or exceptionally fast 4.4 40 yard run. We know Crabtree is not exceptionally tall at 6-1 but it’s still unknown if he is exceptionally fast.
The point is physical attributes make up a lot how NFL defenses scheme and how an offense will try to use you. Big receivers makes easy outlet passes during blitzes. Fast receivers stretch the defense and force teams to keep a man in front to prevent the home run play. There are a few legit #1 receivers without either attributes, Hines Ward is the best example. However, Hines is effective as an NFL receiver because he plays great situational football. His fundamentals are also strong, you notice on most pass plays he has completely bodied out the defender from making a play on the ball which allows him to complete the catch. Reggie Wayne is another guy who is effective with great fundamentals.
Also if you are going to draft a guy that high it’s because he has those desired attributes: height and speed
I don't know this for sure...
… but did guys like I.Bruce and M.Harrison have really good 40 times? How about Tory Holt and Anquan Boldin? I’m just asking as I’m not entirely sure, but I would love for the 49ers to find a guy like Bruce, Harrison, Holt or Boldin with ANY pick in the draft, even if it’s the #10 pick.
I know I. Bruce and T. Holt ran exceptionally fast times. Don’t know about M. Harrison but he’s been known throughout his career as a speedster, so I do assume he ran a fast time too.
Boldin has exceptional size but is notoriously known as a guy who ran an awful combine time 4.8 something. Boldin was a 2nd round pick because of his slow time. Now, Boldin runs people over like monster fullback and he didn’t lose much speed stepping into pads. However, Crabtree is not going to play Boldin’s style of football . . . no WR is . . . I’m hoping VD does.
Torry Holt was never fast
he just had amazing hands and ran great routes and was solidly built.
Other than death and taxes, only 4 things in this world are indisputable:
Brandon Roy is the BEST player in the NBA in the clutch.
Montana to Rice were the greatest to ever play the game.
The Four Horsemen of Maddux, Smoltz, Glavine and Avery were unstoppable.
No one protects the pipes like Luongo.
by GreatOden'sRaven on Apr 14, 2009 11:36 AM PDT up reply actions
ok i take that back
he was fast. my bad. 4.34
Other than death and taxes, only 4 things in this world are indisputable:
Brandon Roy is the BEST player in the NBA in the clutch.
Montana to Rice were the greatest to ever play the game.
The Four Horsemen of Maddux, Smoltz, Glavine and Avery were unstoppable.
No one protects the pipes like Luongo.
by GreatOden'sRaven on Apr 14, 2009 11:37 AM PDT up reply actions
Re:
It’s because No #1 receivers in the NFL are either exceptionally tall 6-3 or exceptionally fast 4.4 40 yard run.
Be my guest going through NFL rosters and finding #1 WRs that run 4.4 40s. Most NFL #1 WRs are NOT either 6’3 (or taller) or on record with a sub 4.4 40. That is a MYTH.
If your opinion is that you can’t draft a guy who is 6’1 and runs a 4.5 40 in the first round, that’s a fine opinion. Once more, though, don’t question his work ethic. That was my problem with your original post.
OK Redskins fan . . .
I know dealing with Snyder has jaded your perception over the years. After all, your the team that believed in Brandon Lloyd (Height 6-0, 40 yard 4.62) and paid him big $$$ after we happily dumped him.
NFC East
Cowboys – Roy Williams, Height: 6-3
Redskins – Santana Moss, 40 yard 4.31
Eagles – lets say Desean Jackson by default, 40 yard 4.35
Giants – was Plaxico Burris, Height 6-5
NFC North
Lions – Calvin Johnson, Height 6-5, 40 yard 4.35
Packers – Greg Jennings, 40 yard 4.42
Vikings – Bernard Berryman, 40 yard 4.47
Bears – Devin Hester, 40 yard 4.27
NFC South
Bucs – Antonio Bryant, 40 yard 4.48
Panthers – Steve Smith, 40 yard 4.38
Saints – Marques Colston, Height 6-5
Falcons – Roddy White, 40 yard 4.47
NFC West
Rams – Donnie Avery, 40 yard 4.43
Seahawks – Nate Burleson, Height 6-1, 40 yard 4.51 (Ok, you have one!)
Cardinals – Larry Fitzgerald, Height 6-3, 40 yard 4.48
49ers – Missing #1, Issac Bruce was a 40 yard 4.3 in his day. Possibly Josh Morgan, 40 yard 4.46
Let’s not even get into the AFC, I think that’s proof enough..
Sorry, I’m not a big measurement guy myself but the adage of measurements appears to hold true for current NFL receivers. Now, if Crabtree is faster than 4.5 than I like his prospects much, much better. However, no one from Lubbockville challenged my assertion about his lack of speed. There is a report out saying Crabtree has unusually long arms which also does significantly help his case, think Rod Smith (he turned out pretty good). Than again the guy reporting the long arm info also said Vernon Davis was an average blocker and works with Scouts.com who still insist Crabtree’s height is 6-3 despite the official combine measurement.
My biggest peeve with the Crabtree hype is the insistence that he is the best prospect in the draft. He was a great in college but so were several well known WR busts with stellar college resumes.. I’m merely pointing out the guy doesn’t have the measurements and red flags should be going up before a team thinks it’s lucky because he slid their way. He also isn’t the polished receiver Reggie Wayne was when he came out of college (basically the only top guy not at least 6-3 or runs 40 yard 4.4 time)
Why not get into the AFC? It starts with Baltimore and Cincy, Derrick Mason and TJ Houshmenzadeh.
What you are saying is that if Crabtree runs a 4.49 “his prospects” look “much, much better” than if he runs a 4.51. That’s pretty arbitrary.
I think this conversation is moot, anyways, since it’s becoming increasingly apparent that he won’t be around at 10.
What do you mean Crabtree isn’t “polished”? Are you still insisting that he doesn’t have good fundamentals? Because he does. Why are you still caught up on this fundamentals or polish nonsense.
Clearly you are a big measurement guy because that’s the only knock you can have on a guy who was without a doubt the best receiver in the toughest conference in football last year.
Also, I dq your comment for Bernard Berryman.
Rafael Rodriguez: Your number 8 organizational prospect before stepping a foot on American soil and has "looked just super so far," according to Felipe Alou. "He has some bat speed and the ball comes off the bat pretty well" - K.Law.
by BrianBokake on Apr 18, 2009 11:40 AM PDT up reply actions
My responses:
I think it is absolutely a good idea to scrutinize every one of your draft picks, but especially your first one. San Fransisco is picking at 10 from the sounds of it, and you should expect value for that pick. I don’t think you’re entitled to a HOFer at 10, but good teams draft productive starters at 10. With that in mind, fans, wisely, should question whomever the talking heads predict at that spot.
I’ve read through much of the thread (as I’m sure you have) and I don’t think anyone is suggesting that Michael Crabtree is some kind of sacred cow. The things worth discussing, your red flags, are all somewhere here. He is injured. He isn’t 6’4. He doesn’t run a sub 4.4 40. The reality is, only a tiny fraction of people on the planet are 6’4 and run a sub 4.4 (or 4.5) 40. If that is a “red flag,” and it might be, then the wisest thing to do is NOT draft a WR in the 1st round… period. All 32 teams reached that conclusion last season.
What I would stress in relation to these measurables is that they are always a proxy. Measurables are what you use to increase an unproductive player’s draft stock. 40 times, even heights and weights, are not themselves independently valuable. They are things we tend to associate with on-field success, and where that success is pretty demonstrable, these measurables should be deemphasized in my opinion. We might need some reason, for instance, to explain away a lack of production if the guy flat out is a physical beast, by why do we ever need a reason to explain away nigh unprecedented production? Are Crabtree’s measurables so beyond what we would expect so as to make his production — very arguably the far more relevant predictive metric — the second inquiry? Why start with his measurables and then argue to his actual football career and not the other way around?
But even all that misses the point. Michael Crabtree is 6’1 (closer to 6’2) and weighs 215 pounds and is not as fast as Calvin Johnson and Larry Fitzgerald. Those make him, probably, a worse football player than he would be if he were 7’2 and ran a 4.1 40. But he’s not, so let’s discuss the impact those measurables have. What the OP missed though, and what I think needs to be vociferously stated, is that some things the OP criticized were demonstrably false. IT would be just as wrong to claim Michael Crabtree was 7’2 as it is to say he lacks work ethic. It is one thing to say his particular skill set won’t last in the NFL, and another to say that his love of the game is a concern.
The notion that Crabtree is a slam-dunk can’t-miss player seems to defy any sort of serious analysis.
Shouldn’t be unique to Crabs. The reality is that notion you mention is a myth; history is replete with sure-thing, can’t-miss, slam-dunk players who turned out to be busts. Crabtree isn’t an unique snowflake in that regard. There are no guarantees in the NFL draft. What smart scouts and fans should evaluate is the body of evidence available, and I think the evidence differs dramatically from that presented by the OP in some regards. He got the measurables right but everything else wrong, in my opinion. I think it is just as bad to ignore evidence, potential “red flags,” as it is to misstated facts or present totally unsupported, and perhaps refutable, conjecture. Maybe Michael Crabtree will take up Professional Wrestling in Week 7 of the 2011 season and never return to football? Is that possible? Yes. Is there any evidence to support that happening? No. Does it add anything to a determination on his draft value at 10? Absolutely not.
When you ask:
why no caution at all on the part of his supporters?
You just don’t know the supporters. I have enormous confidence in Michael Crabtree, but that doesn’t mean my fingers won’t be crossed the first time he steps on an NFL field.
Peter Warrick: Phenomenal CFB player who busted. Was less productive than Crabtree. The anecdote on Warrick is that he was replaced by T. J. Houshmandzadeh in 2004… a 7th round pick at 6’1, sub-200 pounds and a 4.6+ 40 time. What that should demonstrate is how much of a crap-shoot this draft thing really is. Are we sure that Crabtree is going to be better than some Anquan Boldin or Marques Colston look alike? No, you just play the percentages and pick the guy with the best body of work, and Crabtree’s compares favorably to anyone’s in the country.
Desmond Howard: (Was a Pro Bowler!)
I don’t even want to get into the others.
Bottom line: I’m sympathetic to anyone who thinks 1st round picks shouldn’t be spent on WRs, but based on the available evidence Michael Crabtree is at least as sure-thing, can’t-miss, as anyone else who has ever participated in an NFL draft. We should not simply ignore the aspects of his game that give pause, but let’s evaluate those things honestly against the entire body of work. If we do that, I think it’s a really, really tall order to suggest that Crabtree isn’t one of, if not the, best WR available in this draft.
T. J. Houshmandzadeh and Peter Warrick (he was productive before getting hurt but the Bengals were killed for taking a slot receiver in the Top 5) were #2 receivers that played in the slot.
Not saying #2 receivers or those that play in the slot cannot be top notch producers but you don’t use top picks at that position. You use a upper tier 1st round pick on the guy who is going to stretch the field with blazing speed or the guy who is such large target that defenses cannot afford to blitz leaving him 1 on 1 with a CB he will overpower.
Well Houshmandzadeh is going to be a #1 receiver next year. Anquan Boldin was a productive #1 receiver before Larry Fitzgerald showed up.
I find it a little nuts that you’re so worked up over 1-2 inches or less than a tenth of a second on a 40 time in the face of overwhelming success on the field. Again, measurements are supposed to tell you something about a player’s ability to catch footballs and get your team yards. Why do we need measurements if we have evidence that a guy catches footballs and gets yards?
Next question: If the concern is bust WRs, that happens all the time, even with very talented tall, fast guys. Why is Crabtree unique? Maybe people shouldn’t be drafting WRs in the 1st round at all, BUT if there is a WR worth drafting in the first round, a 2-time Biletnikoff winner has to be in that conversation, and you seem to suggest that he shouldn’t because his 40 time is only faster than probably half hte starting WRs in the league and he’s only as tall as the other half.
It seems like ...
… you’re agreeing that Crabtree has some risk involved in picking him, but only insomuch as any player has some risks involved, and I think that’s missing the point.
There are a couple of reasons why Crabtree is a riskier pick than most other non-QB players we might take at that spot.
1) He’s a WR, and WR’s are a high-risk position, with a higher bust percentage than most positions.
2) His measurables aren’t great, and draft history is FULL of guys who put up great production in college but couldn’t bring it to the next level because of raw physical gifts.
3) His performance needs to be evaluated in the context of a pass-wacky school which will inflate a receiver’s numbers.
You seem fixated on one source of draft mistakes: focusing on measurables rather than performance. But I’m trying to get you to look a little deeper, because I think you’re missing something:
When players fail to translate their college performance into pro performance, it’s often because they simply weren’t physically adequate. Now, again, I’m not claiming this is the case with Crabtree, but clearly all great college players aren’t great pro players.
To me, ignoring performance in favor of measurables is absolutely moronic. On the other hand, the jump in athleticism required between college and the pros is so big, that simply assuming that performance will translate is almost as stupid.
Not too long ago, people were asking if it would make sense for a team to trade their entire draft class for Reggie Bush. People raised questions about him because of his size, and they were brushed aside – yet it appears that NOT taking Bush, who had incredible performance in college – was the right choice.
I think Peter Warrick is a good counterexample here. Yes, Michael Crabtree’s production was a little better in college, although not so much better that it makes sense to dismiss the comparison – especially when you count for the Texas Tech factor.
Dismissing Desmond Howard because he made the pro bowl is a mistake, because he made the pro bowl as a returner. In 2000, the year he made the pro bowl, he made TWO catches. Two. Not per game. In the entire season. He was a complete failure as a receiver.
In baseball it’s easy to translate minor league stats to the pros, because the game is basically the same, and we have enough statistical evidence to make strong correlations. Is basketball, it’s usually easy to see the limitations that a player’s raw gifts will put on him. Football is somewhere between the two – there are so many other factors that affect performance that neither approach makes total sense.
Re:
1) He’s a WR, and WR’s are a high-risk position, with a higher bust percentage than most positions.
2) His measurables aren’t great, and draft history is FULL of guys who put up great production in college but couldn’t bring it to the next level because of raw physical gifts.
3) His performance needs to be evaluated in the context of a pass-wacky school which will inflate a receiver’s numbers.
If your position is 1) then it doesn’t matter what his measurables are. A lot of people (I’m kind of one of them) subscribe to the theory that WRs in the 1st round is typically a mistake. But that’s not a knock on Crabtree, that’s just a different drafting strategy.
2) His measurables are not horrible. He’s tall enough and fast enough to be in the NFL, based on recorded numbers. The OP’s big point was that he’s slower or shorter than Calvin Johnson, Larry Fitzgerald, or Braylon Edwards. But that’s true of everyone on the planet. The draft is full of players who were fast or tall who weren’t great NFL players, either; I’m a Redskins fan, I know these things. Taylor Jacbos ran a 4.37. Mark Clayton ran a 4.45 and he’s not developed into a star. There are plenty of tall receivers who haven’t panned out, like Mike Williams or Michael Jenkins (though his career could be heading in the right direction).
On the flip side, was Anquan Boldin’s 4.7 indicative of how good he was? No, as it turned out the better metric would have been his fantastically successful college career.
The emphasis placed on the 40 yard dash is a joke. Year by year it is becoming, increasingly, a joke. But if you’re really worried about Crabtree’s 40 time, are you sure he’s put his best in? Larry Fitzgerald came out of college without running under a 4.5.
He’s 5 100ths of a second away from being the mythically important sub 4.5 guy.
Regarding 3), do you think that has helped or hurt him? I think it would be strange to say that a receiver who has received more balls is worse off than someone who has had less. No one can possibly doubt that Crabtree’s numbers are inflated because it would be impossible for anyone in a non-inflated offense to put his numbers up! But the context is: Michael Crabtree got a lot more receiving snaps in 2 years than did most players, learned an offense that requires an intense understanding of defenses, route running, space, and timing, and was the most productive WR under that system by far. Texas Tech isn’t spitting out Biletnikoff winners prior to Crabtree.
When players fail to translate their college performance into pro performance, it’s often because they simply weren’t physically adequate. Now, again, I’m not claiming this is the case with Crabtree, but clearly all great college players aren’t great pro players.
You’ve over simplified why great college players don’t turn into great pro players. There are a lot of reasons, one of many of them being physical adequacy. You aren’t claiming Crabtree is physically adequate to play in the NFL, because he demonstrably is physically adequate. He is not 5’3, 120 pounds, running a 4.9.
On the other hand, the jump in athleticism required between college and the pros is so big, that simply assuming that performance will translate is almost as stupid.
I’m a law student so I’ll spell it out in legal terms. A great CFB career creates a rebutabble presumption that a player will translate into a good pro player, that can be rebutted by showing physical inadequacy or some other fatal character flaw. There is no physical inadequacy regarding Crabtree, he’s fast and tall enough. There are no apparent fatal character flaws.
I do not think you should ignore any available evidence. But some evidence is more useful than others. Is Crabtree’s grade in Calculus likely to reflect how good of an NFL player he will be? It might, if he had a good one it would show he’s smart, if he had a failing grade it might show his commitment to something was lacking. But I’m not going to compare his calculus grade to his 40 time, because the latter is far more interesting to me if I care about his professional development. Likewise, if I’m trying to figure out a reason to draft a guy, I’m not going to look at one of the most prolific receivers in CFB history and declare him too risky to pick because his 40 time is 4 tenths of a second away from where it allegedly should be, or because he’s ONLY 6’1, 215 pounds.
Not too long ago, people were asking if it would make sense for a team to trade their entire draft class for Reggie Bush. People raised questions about him because of his size, and they were brushed aside – yet it appears that NOT taking Bush, who had incredible performance in college – was the right choice.
First, I’m not one of those people. Second, we’re both guilty of this, the plural of anecdote is not data. You say Reggie Bush, I say Anquan Boldin. Where are we? Are we just going to count anecdotes against one another until one of us forfeits? Let’s just agree that:
1) CFB production is some indicator of NFL success
2) Speed and height are also some indicators of NFL success
If that is the OP’s point, or your point, then it’s 100% correct and also 100% uninteresting. The real inquiry should be the relative weight we place on these two, and we can have that inquiry in regards to Michael Crabtree. Some people think his speed and height aren’t enough to overcome his OVERWHELMING production in CFB. If you agree, then you’ve simply elevated 2) and lowered 1) to the point of lunacy, in my opinion.
If your point is only that we should think about Crabtree’s measurables in predicting his pro success, sure, I think reasonable people all agree on that. But so what?
I think the real difference between us
Is this:
“Some people think his speed and height aren’t enough to overcome his OVERWHELMING production in CFB. If you agree, then you’ve simply elevated 2) and lowered 1) to the point of lunacy, in my opinion.”
To me, his production in college just isn’t as ovewhelming as it is to you, because of the system he played in. Now, maybe that’s a mistake on my part, and the truth is, it’s pretty easy to come up with a reason to discount a college player’s performance.
But it’ll be interesting to see. In any even, my reasons for not wanting to take him have much more to do with his position than his potential, even though it’s unlikely he’ll be there when we draft.
I am glad.
We have identified the issue on which we disagree.
The only parting point I would make is that if Michael Crabtree’s College performance wasn’t enough to convince you of looking past his (perfectly adequate) measurables, then it is probably the case that there will never be a receiver who can be 6’1 and run a 4.54 who will have accomplished enough in College to overcome your presumption that he should not be drafted. It might be the case that we never see a receiver as productive as Michael Crabtree over a two year period who also happens to run a 4.54 or better 40 or be 6’1 or taller.
That doesn’t make your position logically fatal by any means. But I do think it belies a pretty substantial insistence that measurables are more important than production, or at least that production is largely irrelevant in the absence of some measurables certain.
Just out of curiosity, how tall or fast would he have had to have been where you would care about his College production? Or is that a dumb question; are you coming close to saying that College production is wholly irrelevant… even if the player is fast and tall?
Trying to get at a metric here that I understand. There are a lot of ways to interpret the data. We could evaluate them all holistically, we could evaluate them separately and then give larger emphasis to one over the other. We could standardize some minimum in each (height/speed certain or production certain) that must be met before someone qualifies for 1st round consideration, etc. Crabtree’s College performance was so impressive that I’m convinced you either don’t care about production at all (a fine opinion I suppose, though I disagree with it) or that you’ve got some heigh/speed certain requirement that Crabtree hasn’t met. If it is this latter, I am very interested in what the height/speed numbers you think every player must have. Because if his 40 time isn’t good enough, we might say that his 40 time isn’t good enough… yet.
(And if it is his height
I think it is enough to point out that he is taller than many (most?) NFL Wide Receivers.)
My main concern with Crabtree ...
… is not height or weight or speed.
It’s Texas Tech.
You and I disagree about this, I just don’t think you can put his stats up against players from schools who run more pro-like offenses.
The primary reason I’m interested in his “measurables” is because I’m looking for clues to help me understand how much to deflate his stats based on the Texas Tech factor.
And honestly, I don’t know. This is why I keep saying that I don’t really have an opinion about him. (I don’t want us to take him because of the WR-bust factor and because I don’t think top WRs make that much of a difference to average passing teams).
So if he had put up the same stats, and had the same measurables, but he had played at Notre Dame or USC – or any other of the big-name schools that don’t play a cupcake schedule? I wouldn’t be so concerned about his measurables. I’d – like you – only be concerned if he was very small or very slow – somewhere around 5’11 or shorter I’d start to get nervous, thinking of Desmond Howard. I’d want to see game tape of when he went one-on-one against a top CB, see what happened. Is he strong enough to handle the bump? Does he have the burst to get separation?
A lot of guys succeed in college because they’re faster than the strong guys or stronger than the fast guys, and then struggle in pros because everybody is strong and fast.
But with the TT system, it’s harder to judge. I mean, look at the QB’s they’ve had and the numbers they’ve put up: #4, at the time of his graduation, in total yards thrown by a college QB – washed out of the pros. Symons? Set a record for passing yards. He’s in the Arena league now. Cumbie? SIxth most yards in NCAA history in a season, in the Arena league. Cody HOdges, similar story.
Okay, that’s QBs. But there’s a bigger difference between QB’s and receivers, right?
Well, Wes Welker went to TT, and that’s an interesting data point. He was a game-breaking receiver there, but now is the world’s greatest possession receiver. Mickey Peters caught 78 balls for ‘em one year – no pro career. Nehemiah Glover? No pro career. Carlos Francis? 1000 yards for the Red Raiders … washed out of the pros. Joel Filani? Great college stats, no pro stats. Robert Johnson – has he done anything in the pros? Danny Amendola? He’s a practice squad player.
And it’s not like these guys put up no numbers. 70, 80 catches. 1000 yards. Now, those aren’t Crabtree numbers, sure. And Crabtree has better measurables than all of those guys. But the fact that so many guys put up such fantastic numbers for the Red Raiders and couldn’t even get on the NFL field makes me look at Crabtree (amazing) production with some skepticism.
Re:
You and I disagree about this, I just don’t think you can put his stats up against players from schools who run more pro-like offenses.
I agree with you, but how could you put his stats up against players from schools who run more pro-life offenses? No player who has ever played WR in a pro-life offense has put up better numbers?
In any event, is the receiver better when he is constantly double teamed or when the safety has to eyeball the run? Does anyone doubt that every defense Michael Crabtree beat in the 2008 season was focused more on him than on the run game? Why are WRs from pro-style offenses better than WRs from passing offenses? Just as an intuitive matter, wouldn’t it seem to be the case that WRs from passing offenses are, all things equal, better than WRs from pro-style offenses?
The primary reason I’m interested in his "measurables" is because I’m looking for clues to help me understand how much to deflate his stats based on the Texas Tech factor.
This sounds like preemptive bias, though. Why are you looking for clues to deflate his production? The philosophical disagreement we have is that you think college production is something that should be disproved by measurables, and I think measurables should be used to disprove a lack of college production. If your emphasis is right, why do we have CFB? Why can’t we just find a bunch of track athletes who happen to be tall and put pads on them?
Regarding this whole comparison to Crabtree and: Filani, Johnson, Francis, etc. Might as well be apples to oranges. Crabtree has better measurables than all those guys. He also happens to have better production than all those guys. Between the 7 someodd receivers you list and Michael Crabtree, the score is 0-2 Biletnikoff awards. We are talking about good but not great CFB receivers and a HISTORICALLY GOOD CFB receiver (who happens to have very solid measurables).
Really Carlos Francis is the perfect example. This entire debate has been about production vs. measurables. Well Francis ran like a 4.33 40 yard dash. He was just another pretty good WR with an incredible College QB throwing to him that happened to be much worse than his “measurables.” So what does he have in common with Michael Crabtree? Nothing. The only reason Francis got selected in the 4th round was because he had good measurables, and that turned out to be totally bogus. What people should have looked at was his CFB career, which was good but not great. He was just another so-so player who increased his draft stock by running a meaningless 40 yard dash. Michael Crabtree is the anti-Carlos Francis.
You’re talking about Mickey Peters, Francis, Glover, Filani, Danny? What do these guys have in common with Michael Crabtree? Part of the vetting process in the NFL is that professional scouts immediately recognize that some semi-productive CFB players (Peters, Johnson, Filani) are not and will never meant to be professional football players. No professional scout worth his weight in gold has reached that conclusion regarding Crabtree… in large part because he’s MASSIVELY more accomplished than any of the Tech receivers before him.
What your position comes down to is, because Texas Tech, some moderately successful school in West Texas with little recruiting power even in its own bread basket of talent, hasn’t had a professional WR come out of the program (a position that is factually wrong, since Wes Welker is a stud) that it is incapable of producing one. The problem with this position is, it would be true even if Michael Crabtree were 7’1, ran a 4.1 40, and had won the Biletnikoff not twice but thrice (or QUICE!).
What could a Tech receiver possibly do, that Crabtree hasn’t done, to overcome this presumption that Mickey Peters/Robert Johnson defines Texas Tech? I don’t follow Georgia Tech at all, but was Calvin Johnson one in a long series of successful Yellow Jacket (isn’t that what they are?) WRs?
What is it you want to say? Since Joel Filani was a great Big-12 receiver but not a great NFL receiver, we should temper our opinion of Crabtree? I think that’s imminently reasonable. But how far do we temper? You know, if Crabtree had played at Ohio State, he’d only have won ONE Biltenikoff. In a pro-style offense, he’d only have been good for 1300 yards and 11 touchdowns, what a scrub. My point is that there is simply no way to minimize his CFB accomplishments through contextualizing Texas Tech, without concluding that Michael Crabtree is an hugely successful player.
by Skin Patrol on Apr 14, 2009 11:35 PM PDT up reply actions
Preemptive bias
Now you’re talking a chicken-and-egg question. When you look at the history of TT football players, it’s very easy to see why one might have some skepticism about them.
The problem with saying, “Well, they’re a passing team, that makes it harder on the receivers” is that TT floods the secondary with receivers, and mixes it up with a lot of screens instead of a classic running game. Teams which are built to stop more traditional attacks don’t have enough secondary players to handle what TT is throwing at them. They CAN’T double Crabtree (or anyone else) because their secondary is already stretched too thin. As a freshman, Crabtree was one of two 100-catch receivers … and another guy had 75. That’s not a team you can load up to stop one receiver on.
Basically, you look at the history of TT receivers, and you come to the conclusion that 80 catches and a thousands yards correlates with, well, very little chance of success in the pros. How does that correlate with 130 catches and nearly 2000 yards? That’s a difficult question. But remember, in most offenses, 80 catches and a thousand yards means you’re a probably medium-to-high draft pick. From TT, it means NOTHING.
That’s not preemptive bias. That’s history.
What could Crabtree do to overcome the bias against Texas Tech? Probably nothing. He’s done everything that he’s been asked to do and then some. But the problem is: what was he asked to do, and how strong is the correlation between that and what he’s going to be asked to do in the pros?
I mean, Tyler Hansborough did everything you could ask a college basketball player to do. He is historically great: most career points in the ACC, most rebounds of any player in UNC history, I could go on. Does that mean you say he’s a can’t miss guy (to the extent that anyone is a can’t miss guy)?
HUH??
So Crabtree is short, slow, can’t jump, is lacking at all the fundamentals, is dumb, lazy, unmotivated, and runs bad routes. Somebody better tell the guys on the Belitnikoff committee because they screwed up royally – twice. They must be slow learners with no grasp of the game. Better call all the All-American voters, too. Don’t bother calling any Big 12 teams. They already know how bad he is.
by TechFirst on Apr 11, 2009 7:09 AM PDT reply actions 1 recs
Bignerd is Prophetic...
in screen name only.
Skin Patrol’s posts were just lovely…I savored every morsel.
Bignerd. If you were trying to get some attention...
you got some attention, congratulations. Some people just want to get noticed, no matter what for.
Crabtree won’t be around at ten. A couple of teams are planning to trade up if he makes it past five. Being a Cowboys fan, it would kill me to see him go to the 49’ers, but if it happens, your ridiculous analysis will have no bearing on reality. The kid has as much chance as anyone to make it in the NFL if he can stay healthy.
WHY WAS THIS POST REC'D?!?!?!?!
I just want it to die…
Blind devotion.
by ProfessorBigelow on Apr 14, 2009 9:20 AM PDT reply actions
Maybe....
… the post was rec’d because of the ensuing discussion that followed it?
I'm just speculating...
… as I certainly didn’t rec this post.
Then rec the discussion, not the post
As much as I would LOVE to have crabtree, our time is better spent on realistic draft possibilities. I think our heads are in the clouds a bit on this one (draft wise)…
Blind devotion.
by ProfessorBigelow on Apr 15, 2009 5:29 AM PDT up reply actions
Is this...
the Rod Blagojevich of posts?
by David Fucillo on Apr 14, 2009 9:29 AM PDT up reply actions
does it have an awkward toupe?
Other than death and taxes, only 4 things in this world are indisputable:
Brandon Roy is the BEST player in the NBA in the clutch.
Montana to Rice were the greatest to ever play the game.
The Four Horsemen of Maddux, Smoltz, Glavine and Avery were unstoppable.
No one protects the pipes like Luongo.
by GreatOden'sRaven on Apr 14, 2009 11:39 AM PDT up reply actions
Die....die....die....
I[t] can’t.
Don't sweat it. I'm illiterate.
by methodrampage on Apr 15, 2009 8:32 AM PDT up reply actions
What happens on the field> workout #s
by BradyQuinnisBeast on Apr 15, 2009 2:58 PM PDT reply actions
.
Rafael Rodriguez: Your number 8 organizational prospect before stepping a foot on American soil and has "looked just super so far," according to Felipe Alou. "He has some bat speed and the ball comes off the bat pretty well" - K.Law.
by BrianBokake on Apr 18, 2009 11:43 AM PDT up reply actions
That’s what she said!
My Dave Righetti is better than your Dave Righetti.
by howtheyscored on Apr 20, 2009 6:28 PM PDT up reply actions
one reason for now Crabtree
We don’t need VD and crabs (thank you, I’ll be here all week)
by David Fucillo on Apr 20, 2009 6:55 PM PDT up reply actions
I don’t get it.
Don't sweat it. I'm illiterate.
by methodrampage on Apr 21, 2009 7:04 AM PDT up reply actions
I think he’s saying that they wouldn’t get along very well.
My Dave Righetti is better than your Dave Righetti.
by howtheyscored on Apr 21, 2009 7:08 AM PDT up reply actions
I was unaware of any personal clash between the two. I wouldn’t be suprised if they could not only coesist but thrive together.
Don't sweat it. I'm illiterate.
by methodrampage on Apr 21, 2009 12:36 PM PDT up reply actions
he meant crabs and VD in an STD if u get it from sex not a good thing
by 49ersAllTheWay on Apr 21, 2009 11:40 PM PDT up reply actions
I believe that’s the joke we’re all running with.
Fooch makes a joke, method feigned not understanding, I feigned misunderstanding, and then method actually turned it very neatly right back to the original punchline with the skill of a guy who’s made jokes about STDs before.
My Dave Righetti is better than your Dave Righetti.
by howtheyscored on Apr 22, 2009 7:21 PM PDT up reply actions
What?
STD’s are no joke.
Don't sweat it. I'm illiterate.
by methodrampage on Apr 23, 2009 8:24 AM PDT up reply actions

by 



























