DK Metcalf is your 1.01 now.

[xlur8ed]

I'm curious to learn everyone's take a Metcalf vs busting. I worry of him 'busting' to the fact 1.01-1.03 was a poor decision. As stated previously in this thread, he is now being proclaimed this years Barkley AND. HE. IS. NOT.

The thread started as an opinion on what the 'public' will view Metcalf as....not what he IS. We are all arguing for or against his worth, but I'm not sure any of us would pass on him at 1.10, so it isn't like he is worthless.

1.01 should always be the safest player on the board. At this time I do not believe that to be Metcalf, but if you put him on GB with their 1R pick, sure, I'm buying at 1.01.

Literally nobody is saying that.

If you're being literal, you are correct. If you are saying there isn't a following that is treating him as a "can't fail", much like the industry treated Barkely, then I'd say you're wrong (this thread is founded on that exact premise). I assumed most would be able to read between the lines, but there is always someone who needs to clarify. It's all good

[Ice]

I'm curious to learn everyone's take a Metcalf vs busting. I worry of him 'busting' to the fact 1.01-1.03 was a poor decision. As stated previously in this thread, he is now being proclaimed this years Barkley AND. HE. IS. NOT.

The thread started as an opinion on what the 'public' will view Metcalf as....not what he IS. We are all arguing for or against his worth, but I'm not sure any of us would pass on him at 1.10, so it isn't like he is worthless.

1.01 should always be the safest player on the board. At this time I do not believe that to be Metcalf, but if you put him on GB with their 1R pick, sure, I'm buying at 1.01.

Not sure who is saying he is this years Barkley. This class doesn't really have a Barkley in it but it doesn't mean this class is weak. After Barkley last season there was plenty of diverging opinions about a lot of really good potential players but none rose to his level which is why he was a consensus. Last year I was convinced Jones was a bust but many took him top 4 as an example.

Additionally, WR's are just more difficult to rate given positions between X and Slot as an example.

The only teams I am concerned that Metcalf goes to is the Ravens and maybe the Titans as an example due to their system. Conversely, as you implied if he goes to certain teams his already high overall draft position could go even higher to many.

Where I disagree is evaluating 1.1 as the safest on the board. Granted if a RB goes to a great situation and shows ability I could certainly see that position going 1.1. Jacobs to KC as an example will drive value. Sanders to Detroit could drive value the other direction. With WR's if a player doesn't look to have true #1 potential on his team I won't draft him regardless if he is a safe #2.

With WR's I personally draft based on potential in 3 year windows so taking one at 1.1 doesn't scare me much but they are a bit more risky than RB given it is a harder position to master because they are just more reliant on the QB and line play. RB's need to worry mainly about the O Line. Rb's can be studs in year 1. It is very rare for WR's to be legit studs in year 1. They are more like a good Cabernet. Once opened they get better after a bit.

I believe Metcalf has the lowest bust factor of any WR in this class. There are several others that I am not concerned about either but they just don't have his ceiling IMO. Metcalf's counterpart, Brown has a very low bust factor but his ceiling as a true #1 on his team is more questionable.

I love these types of drafts because the overall talent is actually quite good and there is only 1.1 pick.

[xlur8ed]

I'm curious to learn everyone's take a Metcalf vs busting. I worry of him 'busting' to the fact 1.01-1.03 was a poor decision. As stated previously in this thread, he is now being proclaimed this years Barkley AND. HE. IS. NOT.

The thread started as an opinion on what the 'public' will view Metcalf as....not what he IS. We are all arguing for or against his worth, but I'm not sure any of us would pass on him at 1.10, so it isn't like he is worthless.

1.01 should always be the safest player on the board. At this time I do not believe that to be Metcalf, but if you put him on GB with their 1R pick, sure, I'm buying at 1.01.

Not sure who is saying he is this years Barkley. This class doesn't really have a Barkley in it but it doesn't mean this class is weak. After Barkley last season there was plenty of diverging opinions about a lot of really good potential players but none rose to his level which is why he was a consensus. Last year I was convinced Jones was a bust but many took him top 4 as an example.

Additionally, WR's are just more difficult to rate given positions between X and Slot as an example.

The only teams I am concerned that Metcalf goes to is the Ravens and maybe the Titans as an example due to their system. Conversely, as you implied if he goes to certain teams his already high overall draft position could go even higher to many.

Where I disagree is evaluating 1.1 as the safest on the board. Granted if a RB goes to a great situation and shows ability I could certainly see that position going 1.1. Jacobs to KC as an example will drive value. Sanders to Detroit could drive value the other direction. With WR's if a player doesn't look to have true #1 potential on his team I won't draft him regardless if he is a safe #2.

With WR's I personally draft based on potential in 3 year windows so taking one at 1.1 doesn't scare me much but they are a bit more risky than RB given it is a harder position to master because they are just more reliant on the QB and line play. RB's need to worry mainly about the O Line. Rb's can be studs in year 1. It is very rare for WR's to be legit studs in year 1. They are more like a good Cabernet. Once opened they get better after a bit.

I believe Metcalf has the lowest bust factor of any WR in this class. There are several others that I am not concerned about either but they just don't have his ceiling IMO. Metcalf's counterpart, Brown has a very low bust factor but his ceiling as a true #1 on his team is more questionable.

I love these types of drafts because the overall talent is actually quite good and there is only 1.1 pick.

I corrected my original post to avoid further confusion on what I was intending to state. Apparently I'm the idiot in the room (I'm alright with that every now and then).

Basically what you just wrote a book on (above) is stating you disagree, then following up your statement with agreeing with me

Example:
Where I disagree is evaluating 1.1 as the safest on the board. Granted if a RB goes to a great situation and shows ability I could certainly see that position going 1.1. Jacobs to KC as an example will drive value. Sanders to Detroit could drive value the other direction. With WR's if a player doesn't look to have true #1 potential on his team I won't draft him regardless if he is a safe #2.

So if a RB goes to a really good (I call is 'safe' you call it 'good') spot, you'd feel better about them at 1.01. That's the point here. Metcalf isn't a 1.01 lock, and there are people ALREADY selling as such.

We are all bored this time of year and I LOVE to argue, but truly not a single statement at any point in this thread was worthy of arguing about (I just used a poor choice of wording). We will have all sorts of time to get into pissing matches after the draft and we all pretend to have an algorithm that proves why anything makes sense or discredits the other theory.

[FantasyFreak]

I'm curious to learn everyone's take a Metcalf vs busting. I worry of him 'busting' to the fact 1.01-1.03 was a poor decision. As stated previously in this thread, he is now being proclaimed this years Barkley AND. HE. IS. NOT.

The thread started as an opinion on what the 'public' will view Metcalf as....not what he IS. We are all arguing for or against his worth, but I'm not sure any of us would pass on him at 1.10, so it isn't like he is worthless.

1.01 should always be the safest player on the board. At this time I do not believe that to be Metcalf, but if you put him on GB with their 1R pick, sure, I'm buying at 1.01.

Literally nobody is saying that.

If you're being literal, you are correct. If you are saying there isn't a following that is treating him as a "can't fail", much like the industry treated Barkely, then I'd say you're wrong (this thread is founded on that exact premise). I assumed most would be able to read between the lines, but there is always someone who needs to clarify. It's all good

No worries. The thread was founded on the discussion of whether or not he should be 1.01. Maybe outside of the DLF board people are treating him as can't fail, but I think most people are simply saying it's unlikely he will bust (ala Kevin White.) That is my stance. My stance is as long as he stays healthy, he should become a good NFL player. His ceiling is extremely high, and I think his floor is much higher than bust. The one way I can see him ""busting" is if his career gets derailed by injuries, which he has a history of, so that is a bit of a concern. The other is off field, which he doesn't seem to have a history of. I personally think the safer player is his teammate, AJ Brown, but in terms of ceiling, it's Metcalf.

[FantasyFreak]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6MqWXCUuok4

Has some of the field drills. Seems to come out of his break all right in the one, as DJ says. Gautlet looked good too, no drops. Could nitpicks and say a few grabs weren't totally clean, but that's really nitpicking.

[tresskid84]

Metcalf isn't in my top 5 at wr.

So again, the point of this thread was predicting his ADP, not saying he deserves it. I’m not a huge fan of his. Having said that, having him outside your top 5 WRs seems like a stretch, I’m really curious which 5 wideouts in this class you prefer to Metcalf.

As for the Kevin White comps, it misses the point about why Kevin White was a bad prospect. Kevin White was a bad prospect because he had no real success until he was a 22 year old playing in the big 12. He was drafted at 23. Metcalf just turned 21. He broke out as a redshirt freshman. I agree Metcalf is risky because of the injury history and the limited tape/sample size, but he was at least able to produce before he was older than everybody lining up across from him.

I had Harry, AJ Brown, Hollywood Brown, Deebo, Isabella, Parris, and Butler ahead of Metcalf before the combine and nothing happened to really change that for me.

[Ice]

I'm curious to learn everyone's take a Metcalf vs busting. I worry of him 'busting' to the fact 1.01-1.03 was a poor decision. As stated previously in this thread, he is now being proclaimed this years Barkley AND. HE. IS. NOT.

The thread started as an opinion on what the 'public' will view Metcalf as....not what he IS. We are all arguing for or against his worth, but I'm not sure any of us would pass on him at 1.10, so it isn't like he is worthless.

1.01 should always be the safest player on the board. At this time I do not believe that to be Metcalf, but if you put him on GB with their 1R pick, sure, I'm buying at 1.01.

Not sure who is saying he is this years Barkley. This class doesn't really have a Barkley in it but it doesn't mean this class is weak. After Barkley last season there was plenty of diverging opinions about a lot of really good potential players but none rose to his level which is why he was a consensus. Last year I was convinced Jones was a bust but many took him top 4 as an example.

Additionally, WR's are just more difficult to rate given positions between X and Slot as an example.

The only teams I am concerned that Metcalf goes to is the Ravens and maybe the Titans as an example due to their system. Conversely, as you implied if he goes to certain teams his already high overall draft position could go even higher to many.

Where I disagree is evaluating 1.1 as the safest on the board. Granted if a RB goes to a great situation and shows ability I could certainly see that position going 1.1. Jacobs to KC as an example will drive value. Sanders to Detroit could drive value the other direction. With WR's if a player doesn't look to have true #1 potential on his team I won't draft him regardless if he is a safe #2.

With WR's I personally draft based on potential in 3 year windows so taking one at 1.1 doesn't scare me much but they are a bit more risky than RB given it is a harder position to master because they are just more reliant on the QB and line play. RB's need to worry mainly about the O Line. Rb's can be studs in year 1. It is very rare for WR's to be legit studs in year 1. They are more like a good Cabernet. Once opened they get better after a bit.

I believe Metcalf has the lowest bust factor of any WR in this class. There are several others that I am not concerned about either but they just don't have his ceiling IMO. Metcalf's counterpart, Brown has a very low bust factor but his ceiling as a true #1 on his team is more questionable.

I love these types of drafts because the overall talent is actually quite good and there is only 1.1 pick.

I corrected my original post to avoid further confusion on what I was intending to state. Apparently I'm the idiot in the room (I'm alright with that every now and then).

Basically what you just wrote a book on (above) is stating you disagree, then following up your statement with agreeing with me

Example:
Where I disagree is evaluating 1.1 as the safest on the board. Granted if a RB goes to a great situation and shows ability I could certainly see that position going 1.1. Jacobs to KC as an example will drive value. Sanders to Detroit could drive value the other direction. With WR's if a player doesn't look to have true #1 potential on his team I won't draft him regardless if he is a safe #2.

So if a RB goes to a really good (I call is 'safe' you call it 'good') spot, you'd feel better about them at 1.01. That's the point here. Metcalf isn't a 1.01 lock, and there are people ALREADY selling as such.

We are all bored this time of year and I LOVE to argue, but truly not a single statement at any point in this thread was worthy of arguing about (I just used a poor choice of wording). We will have all sorts of time to get into pissing matches after the draft and we all pretend to have an algorithm that proves why anything makes sense or discredits the other theory.

Actually agreed with most of your post. The only difference is I don't buy a 1.1 as it MUST be the safest pick to be 1.1.

The intent wasn't to confuse.

While Metcalf IMO is worthy of 1.1 IMO; I agree he isn't a lock 1.1 before the draft. In fact, I do not see a lock 1.1 this year. In one league I hold 4 of the first 6 picks and still not sure who I will actually pick first. I am reasonably confident though I will pick a WR and RB with the top 2 selections. I need WR's and could always use a RB.

Depending on location I could see a scenario where I took M. Brown 1.1. He looks fantastic on tape and I compare him to a cross between Tyreek and A. Brown despite his actual weight.

[DJB]

No question hes in contention for 1. 01. Prior to the combine he was my 1. 02 and it hasn't changed at the moment but he and Josh Jacobs are a tier above everyone else in my mind.

Harry still sits at my 1. 03 and Sanders my 1. 04.

I didnt understand all the Harry hate but it had me questioning my own scouting but post combine its alleviated all my worries. Dude can catch is tremendous after the catch and his questions about speed have been answered.

[XxBallMeBlazerxX]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6MqWXCUuok4

Has some of the field drills. Seems to come out of his break all right in the one, as DJ says. Gautlet looked good too, no drops. Could nitpicks and say a few grabs weren't totally clean, but that's really nitpicking.

I think that one break looked bad. Maybe I am looking at the wrong thing? He looks too stiff and awkward, labored. He doesn’t get low and explode like he should and he doesn’t show any body control. When he breaks, he loses speed. He looks fine running straight though.

[hockeyBjj]

0% chance he passes an NFL drug test

So lose him for 4 games his rookie year, then he's either deflated after or then busts again and gets a full year

[Ice]

0% chance he passes an NFL drug test

So lose him for 4 games his rookie year, then he's either deflated after or then busts again and gets a full year

A Gas-Lighter is in the house!

[FantasyFreak]

0% chance he passes an NFL drug test

So lose him for 4 games his rookie year, then he's either deflated after or then busts again and gets a full year

A Gas-Lighter is in the house!

Yeah, that's some objective math right there.

[Vcize]

Consensus: This year has no Zeke/Barkley level player
Xlur8ed: Guys stop saying this guy is a Barkley level player!!
Consensus: Metcalf is probably the 1.1 because he has huge upside, but there is lots of risk with him too
Xlur8ed: Guys stop saying he's a can't miss prospect with no risk!!

[Dynasty DeLorean]

Consensus: This year has no Zeke/Barkley level player
Xlur8ed: Guys stop saying this guy is a Barkley level player!!
Consensus: Metcalf is probably the 1.1 because he has huge upside, but there is lots of risk with him too
Xlur8ed: Guys stop saying he's a can't miss prospect with no risk!!

So basically how every discussion on this forum goes.


Jarvis Landry had a worse 3 cone and 20 yard shuttle than Metcalf, fyi...

[Krypto_King]

As for the Kevin White comps, it misses the point about why Kevin White was a bad prospect. Kevin White was a bad prospect because he had no real success until he was a 22 year old playing in the big 12. He was drafted at 23. Metcalf just turned 21. He broke out as a redshirt freshman. I agree Metcalf is risky because of the injury history and the limited tape/sample size, but he was at least able to produce before he was older than everybody lining up across from him.

Kevin White was a bad prospect because he got injured 3 times. White had like 33%+ market share in Juco as a SO. Metcalf had 16% as a RS FR so he's still waiting to break out. And if you think that actually was a breakout from DK, White had 15%+ his first year at WVA so either way this is mistaken.

1. I don't think there's any data to support JuCo market share as correlating with success. I could be wrong, so if you have it, please share.
2. Per game market share correlates slightly better than total season market share, which is why sites like playerprofiler.com use that to determine breakout age. (source: https://www.rotoworld.com/article/numbe ... -wr?page=1

1. You said he hadn't had any success. He can only dominate the field he's on.
2. Good because I believe White missed a game or 2 so his true numbers are even better.