O.K. So who IS your 1.01?

[Phaded]

With all fairness - Treadwell's tape wasn't really that good either if you're looking for an NFL caliber type player.
There is way too much focus on "oh well players can make contested catches".

That is one of my concerns w/ Harry; however, he is superior to Treadwell.

[Vcize]

Right, but the NFL is often wrong. I hope he does go off the board after them.

Just wondering what u see makes him so good a prospect? He Doesn’t get separation and seems a slightest faster Treadwell .. what was his 3 cone drill ?

Treadwell was one of the least athletic receivers ever drafted in the first round. All the metrics guys argued against him but film guys liked him. It was a win for the metrics side. Michael Thomas was the opposite. Harry looks like a lot of other very successful receivers on paper and the film is good enough for me. I do not pretend to be a scout. I would take Harry because of this. Harry’s 3 cone at his pro day was sub 7 which is excellent for his size.

Thomas was a 78th percentile Sparq athlete. His 40 was slowish but his agility score was high.

[ArrylT]

Voted for Harry, but don't have the 1.01 anywhere so big grain of salt.
Surprised that Butler hasn't garnered more votes. Will be interesting to see if there is a Waldman bump on 4/1 regarding Butler.

I have the sense Waldman is very high on Butler from statements on various podcasts/general water cooler talk type stuff.

I believe it is now all but certain that Butler will be Waldmans WR #1 from the 2019 class. So guess we shall soon see if that makes a difference. At the time of this posting Butler has only garnered 8 of 149 votes or 5% share of 1.01.

[Pullo Vision]

If I earned the 1.01, I'd probably swing for the fences with DK. If I acquired it via trade, I think AJ Brown currently provides the best floor/ceiling combo.

That's interesting, I'd do the opposite. If I were building, I'd go for the safer floor. If/when he hits, you'll always be able to sell. However, if I'm a contender, my team is strong. Unless my depth is abysmal, I'd go for the upside.

[Tvols]

Right, but the NFL is often wrong. I hope he does go off the board after them.

Just wondering what u see makes him so good a prospect? He Doesn’t get separation and seems a slightest faster Treadwell .. what was his 3 cone drill ?

Treadwell was one of the least athletic receivers ever drafted in the first round. All the metrics guys argued against him but film guys liked him. It was a win for the metrics side. Michael Thomas was the opposite. Harry looks like a lot of other very successful receivers on paper and the film is good enough for me. I do not pretend to be a scout. I would take Harry because of this. Harry’s 3 cone at his pro day was sub 7 which is excellent for his size.

Thanks for your insight

[KingsKing]

Voted for Harry, but don't have the 1.01 anywhere so big grain of salt.
Surprised that Butler hasn't garnered more votes. Will be interesting to see if there is a Waldman bump on 4/1 regarding Butler.

I have the sense Waldman is very high on Butler from statements on various podcasts/general water cooler talk type stuff.

I believe it is now all but certain that Butler will be Waldmans WR #1 from the 2019 class. So guess we shall soon see if that makes a difference. At the time of this posting Butler has only garnered 8 of 149 votes or 5% share of 1.01.

I could see him going with Hollywood Brown, Waldman will appreciate everything he does well and wont hold his only true knock(size) against him. I have Brown 2nd ranked in my wr rankings behind Harry, if he was a little bit bigger i would have him 1st, incredible football player.

[Ice]

While I have Metcalf 1.1, I too have M. Brown #2. I agree he is an incredible football player. I like Harry but more in the 5 range behind AJ Brown and Harmon. Just can't get past Harry's separation issues I see when analyzing his tape. I do think he will be good pro but is going to need a QB that is fearless throwing into tight windows.

[Cameron Giles]

Right, but the NFL is often wrong. I hope he does go off the board after them.

Just wondering what u see makes him so good a prospect? He Doesn’t get separation and seems a slightest faster Treadwell .. what was his 3 cone drill ?

Treadwell was one of the least athletic receivers ever drafted in the first round. All the metrics guys argued against him but film guys liked him. It was a win for the metrics side. Michael Thomas was the opposite. Harry looks like a lot of other very successful receivers on paper and the film is good enough for me. I do not pretend to be a scout. I would take Harry because of this. Harry’s 3 cone at his pro day was sub 7 which is excellent for his size.

I don't remember Michael Thomas being a metrics prospect. Rotoviz is a very metric-heavy and that website completely dumped on Thomas and even went as far to say he was worse than Southern Miss Michael Thomas I think that was the day I stopped reading Rotoviz.

Thomas was a big film prospect. His routes were insanely advanced and he was a very reliable hands catcher with ridiculous footwork. He had so many near-elite traits that didn't show up in advanced statistics.

[Dynos]

Just wondering what u see makes him so good a prospect? He Doesn’t get separation and seems a slightest faster Treadwell .. what was his 3 cone drill ?

Treadwell was one of the least athletic receivers ever drafted in the first round. All the metrics guys argued against him but film guys liked him. It was a win for the metrics side. Michael Thomas was the opposite. Harry looks like a lot of other very successful receivers on paper and the film is good enough for me. I do not pretend to be a scout. I would take Harry because of this. Harry’s 3 cone at his pro day was sub 7 which is excellent for his size.

I don't remember Michael Thomas being a metrics prospect. Rotoviz is a very metric-heavy and that website completely dumped on Thomas and even went as far to say he was worse than Southern Miss Michael Thomas I think that was the day I stopped reading Rotoviz.

Thomas was a big film prospect. His routes were insanely advanced and he was a very reliable hands catcher with ridiculous footwork. He had so many near-elite traits that didn't show up in advanced statistics.

Can we say the same thing about marquise brown ?

[Cameron Giles]

Can we say the same thing about marquise brown ?

I'm with you on Marquise Brown and I think because of the injury he's becoming underrated. He is a big-time route runner (who's still getting better) and once he gets the ball in his hands, he's fast and quick enough to create big time YAC. He can abuse DB's at all three levels of the field and was dominant last year in college. I just see a lot of Brandin Cooks/Tyreek Hill in his game.

LisFranc injuries usually aren't good news and I know people are going to harp on the 166 pounds, but I didn't enjoy a WR's games more than Brown this year. Right now, him and A.J. Brown would be the WR's I'd be targeting if I had to use a pick in this class.

[Vcize]

Just wondering what u see makes him so good a prospect? He Doesn’t get separation and seems a slightest faster Treadwell .. what was his 3 cone drill ?

Treadwell was one of the least athletic receivers ever drafted in the first round. All the metrics guys argued against him but film guys liked him. It was a win for the metrics side. Michael Thomas was the opposite. Harry looks like a lot of other very successful receivers on paper and the film is good enough for me. I do not pretend to be a scout. I would take Harry because of this. Harry’s 3 cone at his pro day was sub 7 which is excellent for his size.

I don't remember Michael Thomas being a metrics prospect. Rotoviz is a very metric-heavy and that website completely dumped on Thomas and even went as far to say he was worse than Southern Miss Michael Thomas I think that was the day I stopped reading Rotoviz.

Thomas was a big film prospect. His routes were insanely advanced and he was a very reliable hands catcher with ridiculous footwork. He had so many near-elite traits that didn't show up in advanced statistics.

Like I mentioned above, Thomas' "lack" of athleticism is greatly exaggerated around here. He wasn't elite at anything but he was an above average athlete in every metric other than his 40 time which was only slightly below average.

https://www.playerprofiler.com/nfl/michael-thomas/

His 3-cone and short shuttle both would have been 4th against this year's combine participants, and his broad jump top 10 as well.

His biggest wart was his late breakout age.

[Jason3123]

Treadwell was one of the least athletic receivers ever drafted in the first round. All the metrics guys argued against him but film guys liked him. It was a win for the metrics side. Michael Thomas was the opposite. Harry looks like a lot of other very successful receivers on paper and the film is good enough for me. I do not pretend to be a scout. I would take Harry because of this. Harry’s 3 cone at his pro day was sub 7 which is excellent for his size.

I don't remember Michael Thomas being a metrics prospect. Rotoviz is a very metric-heavy and that website completely dumped on Thomas and even went as far to say he was worse than Southern Miss Michael Thomas I think that was the day I stopped reading Rotoviz.

Thomas was a big film prospect. His routes were insanely advanced and he was a very reliable hands catcher with ridiculous footwork. He had so many near-elite traits that didn't show up in advanced statistics.

Like I mentioned above, Thomas' "lack" of athleticism is greatly exaggerated around here. He wasn't elite at anything but he was an above average athlete in every metric other than his 40 time which was only slightly below average.

https://www.playerprofiler.com/nfl/michael-thomas/

His 3-cone and short shuttle both would have been 4th against this year's combine participants, and his broad jump top 10 as well.

His biggest wart was his late breakout age.

Correct, he had the late breakout age, older prospect. Those things are frowned upon by metrics. He was an outlier. Win some, you lose some.

[FantasyFreak]

A.J. Brown meeting with the Pack. In the slot with Rodgers, he's got to be the 1.01 for me if that happens.