Stop calling Sammy Watkins a stud

[Cameron Giles]

Watkins doesn't have a #1 CB follow him with the rams and it won't happen with kc...

It was as close to a shadow as it gets.

Watkins will still likely get the #1 CB in KC too, but that wasn't the issue for his lack of production and targets. The key for Watkins becoming more fantasy relevant in Kansas City will be if they use him as more of a possession receiver than vertical threat. Hill already stretches the secondary with his speed, so Watkins can operate more in the short and intermediate levels.

[Oddball456]

After last year where Sammy only got 70 targets in 15 games (sat out week 17 along with other starters), I think for sure he will get more targets and be more productive. Will he hit 1000 yards? Maybe, no one knows how this offefense is going to look with Mahonnes under center. As a Sammy owner I just want to be able to put him in my line-up every week and not have to worry too much about getting 1 rec for 7 yards. Last year he had 7 games with 2 or fewer reciptions. In 8 games he had 4 targets or less. That is pretty brutal.

He turns 25 in a couple of months and is locked in with Mahonnes for the next 3 years. If Mahonnes pans out this should be the lowest Sammy is valued for the next 5 years.

[bearsfan34]

It was as close to a shadow as it gets.

Watkins will still likely get the #1 CB in KC too, but that wasn't the issue for his lack of production and targets. The key for Watkins becoming more fantasy relevant in Kansas City will be if they use him as more of a possession receiver than vertical threat. Hill already stretches the secondary with his speed, so Watkins can operate more in the short and intermediate levels.

If that is in fact what ends up happening, would it be a fair comparison in a Reid offence to say Tyreek plays more of the DeSean Jackson role with his elite speed and Sammy plays more of the Maclin role as a possession WR?

[Jfever]

When Sammy was apparently brought in to be a decoy and Robert Woods started picking up steam and built the chemistry with Goff that Sammy never did, didn't Woods then / at that time face opponents #1 corner? Or, did that just not ever happen? I mean, what happened when Sammy was out or dinged up, and Woods numbers? Am I missing something here?

When we watched (I'm assuming you guys watch football) them play, Woods simply looked like the better, more productive, more trustworthy, and stable NFL wide receiver. I realize Sammy Watkins came from the better resume and production at Clemson vs Woods USC, was drafted higher, runs slightly faster,and is a touch bigger, and I also get that Sammy probably did face more opponent defenses #1 cover corner. but... That fact isn't likely to change due to the position he plays.... so.... there is that. * when it came to hands, routes, chemistry... well, at least last year it was Woods > Watkins. And, if memory serves, there were times when Woods was on the field and effective, while Sammy was simply ineffective and couldn't get open or dropped passes or - Goff missed him.

Last year Woods missed 4 games and ended up with 56 receptions on 85 targets for 781 yds and 5 tds. Sammy missed one game and posted a stat line of - 39 receptions on 70 targets for 593 yds with 8tds. So, some of you are painting a picture that without Sammy sucking up coverage, Woods is rendered ineffective. I'd admit that a dinged up / injured Woods was less than effective, but, a healthy Woods is a very good route runner, with good hands, decent size, and good football instincts and IQ. I can't say all that with a clear conscience about Sammy. At the same time, some are saying that Watkins has a build in excuse for putting up the crap numbers he did... Seems like we have some talking out of both sides of their mouths to suit personal biases or narratives.

[gausec]

I'm not sure if this is an upgrade in situation, Mckay is an offensive minded coach, who had a solid running game (to say the least). Reid will maximize Sammy, but there are a ton of mouths to feed, (Hill, Kelce, Hunt). I understand Mahomes has a bigger arm, but if I'm on the outside of owning Sammy this is not getting me excited.

I also find it weird KC gutted their D to then land Sammy.

[WhatWouldDitkaDo]

Without having had time to actually look up more in-depth stats etc...initial reaction is to comp these guys to early 2010s PHI. Hill = DeSean Jackson, Watkins = a better Jeremy Maclin, Kelce = a big upgrade over Brent Celek, and Hunt = a lesser LeSean McCoy. With the KC defense in a rebuild, this offense is going to need to / can put up tons of points. Mahomes owners should be ecstatic, but I think KC in general is going to be one of the best NFL and fantasy offenses in 2018.

[Jfever]

My gut tells me that Mahomes may have issues with turnovers. I'm not comfortable saying that Watkin's will be what some think he will. I think Hill is an electric player, Hunt showed us what he is capable of if the blocking is there, Kelce is a top 3 dynasty TE.

Lets please not forget that we simply DO NOT KNOW how Mahomes will be when the lights are on vs NFL defenses.

[Cameron Giles]

When Sammy was apparently brought in to be a decoy and Robert Woods started picking up steam and built the chemistry with Goff that Sammy never did, didn't Woods then / at that time face opponents #1 corner? Or, did that just not ever happen? I mean, what happened when Sammy was out or dinged up, and Woods numbers? Am I missing something here?

When we watched (I'm assuming you guys watch football) them play, Woods simply looked like the better, more productive, more trustworthy, and stable NFL wide receiver. I realize Sammy Watkins came from the better resume and production at Clemson vs Woods USC, was drafted higher, runs slightly faster,and is a touch bigger, and I also get that Sammy probably did face more opponent defenses #1 cover corner. but... That fact isn't likely to change due to the position he plays.... so.... there is that. * when it came to hands, routes, chemistry... well, at least last year it was Woods > Watkins. And, if memory serves, there were times when Woods was on the field and effective, while Sammy was simply ineffective and couldn't get open or dropped passes or - Goff missed him.

Last year Woods missed 4 games and ended up with 56 receptions on 85 targets for 781 yds and 5 tds. Sammy missed one game and posted a stat line of - 39 receptions on 70 targets for 593 yds with 8tds. So, some of you are painting a picture that without Sammy sucking up coverage, Woods is rendered ineffective. I'd admit that a dinged up / injured Woods was less than effective, but, a healthy Woods is a very good route runner, with good hands, decent size, and good football instincts and IQ. I can't say all that with a clear conscience about Sammy. At the same time, some are saying that Watkins has a build in excuse for putting up the crap numbers he did... Seems like we have some talking out of both sides of their mouths to suit personal biases or narratives.

Watkins posted a 39/593/8 line on 70 targets last season. For the amount of targets, that's a very good statline. I don't understand an argument that suggests Watkins numbers were down because Watkins was bad. If you go back and watch tape, Watkins was creating separation at will, looked fast, was explosive off the line and didn't resemble a player that couldn't produce.



That's Patrick Peterson in one-on-one coverage. Watkins makes him look stupid. There's some miscommunication on the route though, so it doesn't lead to anything.

Neither Woods or Kupp will be ineffective next season. They're both solid receivers who run good routes and were big parts of McVay's offense. However, Watkins consistently took away tougher matchups, drew attention and stretched the field for them to create. Watch this play:



Watkins runs a simple crossing route and two defenders are right on top of him playing zone. Meanwhile, Kupp gets a free release off the LOS and practically goes unnoticed across the field for an easy completion.

Here's another




Look at the attention Watkins draws immediately off his release. Players like Kupp get better releases because of it, jump right into their route and get limited pressure.

There's more of these, but you have to look past the box score. Watkins production last season was limited by playing a specific role to create higher percentage looks for other WR's. McVay wanted Watkins to draw as much attention away from the primary read as possible.

[Novacane]

I think the Brandin Cooks/Desean Jackson comparisons could be legit. 6 receptions 180 yards 2 TDs one week.....2 receptions 20 yards 0 TDs the following week.

Also sounds a lot like Julio Jones.

[Jfever]

Nice post Cameron Giles^. I appreciate your take. The examples you shared make sense. I do however think there is a bit more to it. It's possible that Goff was just going through growing pains. Maybe his progressions were a touch slow, Maybe Watkins is an expensive decoy. His role on an offense may be to make it easier for others to find a one on one mismatch. Seems an odd way to use wr1 talent, but, one can make the argument that by doing so, you are elevating the play of 1, 2, or even 3 other offensive players. So, I guess there is that.

Sammy's stat line last year in 15 games of 39 receptions on 70 targets for 593 isn't what I'd call numbers I'd be happy with from my wr1. But.... his lack of success likely did contribute to Woods very impressive state line in 14 games of 56 receptions from 85 targets and 781 yds. I didn't add in Kupp's production, but, I think it would be more of the same. Kupp did have a very nice rookie campaign and I think it makes sense that Watkin's decoy role had to have contributed to not only Woods, but also Kupp and very likely contribute to there being more room for Gurley to run.

So, then, since Watkins is gone from the Rams, do we expect T.Gurley to struggle like he did before S.Watkins got there from Buffalo? Logical question to an extent because if we expect Woods and Kupp to regress, we should also expect opposing defenses to key in on Gurley even that much more as he would be the number one weapon on that offense. What a twisted web of interrelated pieces... ugh.

[Cameron Giles]

Nice post Cameron Giles^. I appreciate your take. The examples you shared make sense. I do however think there is a bit more to it. It's possible that Goff was just going through growing pains. Maybe his progressions were a touch slow, Maybe Watkins is an expensive decoy. His role on an offense may be to make it easier for others to find a one on one mismatch. Seems an odd way to use wr1 talent, but, one can make the argument that by doing so, you are elevating the play of 1, 2, or even 3 other offensive players. So, I guess there is that.

Sammy's stat line last year in 15 games of 39 receptions on 70 targets for 593 isn't what I'd call numbers I'd be happy with from my wr1. But.... his lack of success likely did contribute to Woods very impressive state line in 14 games of 56 receptions from 85 targets and 781 yds. I didn't add in Kupp's production, but, I think it would be more of the same. Kupp did have a very nice rookie campaign and I think it makes sense that Watkin's decoy role had to have contributed to not only Woods, but also Kupp and very likely contribute to there being more room for Gurley to run.

So, then, since Watkins is gone from the Rams, do we expect T.Gurley to struggle like he did before S.Watkins got there from Buffalo? Logical question to an extent because if we expect Woods and Kupp to regress, we should also expect opposing defenses to key in on Gurley even that much more as he would be the number one weapon on that offense. What a twisted web of interrelated pieces... ugh.

I'm not sure of the answer to that. McVay has been an OC for four years (3 WSH, 1 LA). He had DeSean Jackson in Washington and Sammy Watkins last season. So, he's always had that WR with game-breaking speed who can stretch the field and take attention away. Does LA currently have a comparable player? I don't know. But, McVay is one of the top offensive minds in the league, so I'm sure he'll figure something out. I don't think Woods or Kupp will necessarily be worse next season, I just think they'll have to adjust to clearly being the talented receivers on the team.

[nathanq42]

Looks like the Bengals are done with John Ross

[Jfever]

What's up with Ross?

[nathanq42]

What's up with Ross?

Benched him for a season for 1 fumble then he got injured..

[Dynasty DeLorean]

What's up with Ross?

Benched him for a season for 1 fumble then he got injured..

You mean idiotically used him as a running back which got him injured.

John Ross: 2017-18 Highlights