Allen Robinson - The Forgotten Stud?

[The Dirty Birds]

We must be watching completely different tape of the guys. Neither seperates well, but I've seen Parker separate more than ARob. The fact ARob can run the entire route tree I think has more to do with the system he played in, it doesn't mean Parker is incapable of learning the same in the pros. The fact that he's older is irrelevant imo, you think it makes ARob better? Parker could have came out last yr, I assume he didn't cause there was already 100 WRs coming out.

Anyone else think ARob is more talented than Parker? Now I'm seriously curious.

[schiewerma21]

I like Allen Robinson but I don't think he's a "special talent"

That being said, he is proven and I believe he will be a solid fantasy wr2 which is more than I can say for many players in this class.
He would be my wr5 in this class and that puts him in the 1.08-1.10 range for Robinson.

I would buy for the 1.10
I would sell for the 1.08 or higher.

[dynastyninja]

I definitely agree that people are way too high on Robinson. His ADP is 34, which is late third round. Way too early for me. I thought Moncrief was the most overrated asset before, and I still think it. Robinson is approaching him, though. I liked Robinson a lot during the pre-draft process, but it seems like his value has risen after not even doing that much last year. I'll buy a proven asset for cheaper than him and contend this year instead.

Also, Blackmon will be a real threat to him if he returns. Prime Blackmon is easily better than Robinson. Who knows how good Blackmon will be, but if he returns he's definitely going to get the ball.

[Scorpio78]

We must be watching completely different tape of the guys. Neither seperates well, but I've seen Parker separate more than ARob. The fact ARob can run the entire route tree I think has more to do with the system he played in, it doesn't mean Parker is incapable of learning the same in the pros. The fact that he's older is irrelevant imo, you think it makes ARob better? Parker could have came out last yr, I assume he didn't cause there was already 100 WRs coming out.

Anyone else think ARob is more talented than Parker? Now I'm seriously curious.

I'm with you! I don't think Parker and ARob are on the same planet. For me it's Parker>>>>>>>>Arob. When I watch these two on tape Parker is better at the following: Route running, downfield separation, tracking ability, high-pointing (this one isn't even close), body control, and hands catching (again…not close). So what does ARob do better? Well, from what I can tell he is better at receiving unwarranted hype because he was a darling prior to the draft (although a quick check of the facts will reveal that he was passed over by his own team, the Packers, and the Broncos in the 2nd round of last year's draft). No matter though. Because ARob proved 'em all wrong when he put up garbage time stats using his chest to catch bubble screens against prevent defenses for a Jaguars team that had their best wideout suspended and two others injured. Then ARob broke his foot. Now he's a top 35 start-up pick and being valued ahead of guys like Parker (going to be a top 15 pick), Strong (probably top 25…maybe higher), and DGB (late 1st/early 2nd) (I would even put Perriman ahead of ARob…and there are a few others that will probably be selected before the 62nd overall pick). This doesn't even take into consideration the fact that news on Blackmon has been encouraging and he is EXPECTED to return in 2015 (obviously that isn't official yet, but that is, by most accounts, the expectation). ARob owners believe that Blackmon will have no impact on ARob because, and people are actually saying this, "Arob is the superior talent." No. He. Is. Not. (my opinion…but supported by things like college production, NFL draft pedigree, NFL production, and the overall beastliness that shows up every time you put on Blackmon's tape). In the interest of full disclosure, I own Blackmon everywhere (except one league) and Arob nowhere. So, I do have a dog in this fight…and I'm all in on him. That could blow up in my face or prove to be quite prescient. Time will tell I suppose. What I do know is that if Justin Blackmon and Allen Robinson are both playing in 2015, I don't see any way that Blackmon isn't the Jags leading receiver…rendering Arob (and his ADP of 35) more or less a boom or bust WR3/4 (more bust than boom I would expect). ARob owners either don't see this risk, choose to ignore it, or believe that Blackmon won't be back…which is fine…but you could at least be honest with yourself, recognize that this risk exists, and invest in safer prospects (with draft pedigrees that are likely to be better than ARob).

As far as the OP is concerned I would rank the draft something like this (in no particular order)

Gurley
Gordon
RB that end up in good situation
Cooper
White
DGB
Parker
Strong
Perriman
Winston
And probably 2-3 other guys that will rise prior to and following the draft. So I would probably draft ARob around 1.11-2.01. But even then I'd look for reasons not to do that. He is not worth a mid-first round rookie pick…and I think it would be foolish to take him over any of the wideouts I listed (even with DGB's character concerns and Perriman's rawness).

[TommyL31]

only stupid ppl's opinion are useless. like what you put above. and apparently i need jesus cause parker is not close to robinson in talent. here we can break them down. enlighten me what makes parker better? the fact hes a poor route runner while robinson can run the entire route tree? the fact hes just coming out now but is several months older than robinson already? the fact that while he is significantly faster in the 40 than robinson was but robinson still gets more seperation than parker can hope to get? yeah you go on and gimme a reason parker is way above robinson. i'll be here sipping tea and waiting for it so i can bleep on you with facts again after

So I think Parker pretty easily has more talent than Allen Robinson and I think most NFL scouts and GMs agree as Parker is expected to top 15-20. You can say this is a weak draft class all you want but the difference between a late 2nd and a mid 1st in the NFL draft can't be explained away that easily.

Parker is taller, faster, has better tape, and better production than Allen Robinson did. You can say that is due to Parker being older, which definitely helps, but I still think Parker has a higher upside.

In terms of where I would take him in this draft I would say it depends on the situations of Parker, Strong, and Ajayi. I think Robinson is in that tier. Robinson is lower risk because we've seen him translate to the NFL already but I also think he's potentially lower upside as the Jaguars are a mediocre situation.

To OP's specific question, If I like Parker and Strong's situation (or he's high on DGB which I'm not) and Ajayi goes to a good situation I would take Ajayi at 1.05 knowing that I'll either have Parker, Robinson or Strong at 1.08

[dlf_jules]

Deleted a bunch of posts and a couple parts of posts. Try to keep it relevant.

[Butt Liqueur]

only stupid ppl's opinion are useless. like what you put above. and apparently i need jesus cause parker is not close to robinson in talent. here we can break them down. enlighten me what makes parker better? the fact hes a poor route runner while robinson can run the entire route tree? the fact hes just coming out now but is several months older than robinson already? the fact that while he is significantly faster in the 40 than robinson was but robinson still gets more seperation than parker can hope to get? yeah you go on and gimme a reason parker is way above robinson. i'll be here sipping tea and waiting for it so i can bleep on you with facts again after

So I think Parker pretty easily has more talent than Allen Robinson and I think most NFL scouts and GMs agree as Parker is expected to top 15-20. You can say this is a weak draft class all you want but the difference between a late 2nd and a mid 1st in the NFL draft can't be explained away that easily.

Parker is taller, faster, has better tape, and better production than Allen Robinson did. You can say that is due to Parker being older, which definitely helps, but I still think Parker has a higher upside.

In terms of where I would take him in this draft I would say it depends on the situations of Parker, Strong, and Ajayi. I think Robinson is in that tier. Robinson is lower risk because we've seen him translate to the NFL already but I also think he's potentially lower upside as the Jaguars are a mediocre situation.

To OP's specific question, If I like Parker and Strong's situation (or he's high on DGB which I'm not) and Ajayi goes to a good situation I would take Ajayi at 1.05 knowing that I'll either have Parker, Robinson or Strong at 1.08

I guess I just have to ask, by "better production" do you simply mean TDs (or maybe rec avg)? Otherwise, Robinson (in two years) bested Parker's reception numbers (in four years) and only had 300 fewer receiving yards. Add to that the fact that Parker, for two seasons, played with a QB who threw for close to or greater than 1,000 more yards than Robinson's.

I admit, I am and have been a huge Allen Robinson fan for a while, but I don't get the point of throwing out a blanket statement like "Parker...has better production than Allen Robinson did" when, at best, it's subjective, and at worst, it's patently false.

edit: grammar

[SpartyOn]

I think a lot of people forget how good he was before he got injured. He had 48 catches in 10 games, which would have been around 77 catches in 16 games. That puts him in the neighborhood of Watkins and Matthews rookie seasons, pretty good. He is a very important part of the JAX passing game and is a popular target of Bortles. Just look at Bortles numbers from weeks 10-16, he completely falls off from where he started. Putting Robinson into this year's draft class knowing what I know now he would be top 4, but I am not a fan of this year's class.

[TommyL31]

only stupid ppl's opinion are useless. like what you put above. and apparently i need jesus cause parker is not close to robinson in talent. here we can break them down. enlighten me what makes parker better? the fact hes a poor route runner while robinson can run the entire route tree? the fact hes just coming out now but is several months older than robinson already? the fact that while he is significantly faster in the 40 than robinson was but robinson still gets more seperation than parker can hope to get? yeah you go on and gimme a reason parker is way above robinson. i'll be here sipping tea and waiting for it so i can bleep on you with facts again after

So I think Parker pretty easily has more talent than Allen Robinson and I think most NFL scouts and GMs agree as Parker is expected to top 15-20. You can say this is a weak draft class all you want but the difference between a late 2nd and a mid 1st in the NFL draft can't be explained away that easily.

Parker is taller, faster, has better tape, and better production than Allen Robinson did. You can say that is due to Parker being older, which definitely helps, but I still think Parker has a higher upside.

In terms of where I would take him in this draft I would say it depends on the situations of Parker, Strong, and Ajayi. I think Robinson is in that tier. Robinson is lower risk because we've seen him translate to the NFL already but I also think he's potentially lower upside as the Jaguars are a mediocre situation.

To OP's specific question, If I like Parker and Strong's situation (or he's high on DGB which I'm not) and Ajayi goes to a good situation I would take Ajayi at 1.05 knowing that I'll either have Parker, Robinson or Strong at 1.08

I guess I just have to ask, by "better production" do you simply mean TDs (or maybe rec avg)? Otherwise, Robinson (in two years) bested Parker's reception numbers (in four years) and only had 300 fewer receiving yards. Add to that the fact that Parker, for two seasons, played with a QB who threw for close to or greater than 1,000 more yards than Robinson's.

I admit, I am and have been a huge Allen Robinson fan for a while, but I don't get the point of throwing out a blanket statement like "Parker...has better production than Allen Robinson did" when, at best, it's subjective, and at worst, it's patently false.

edit: grammar

So Robinson's production was very good but I'm talking in terms of share of his offense. In the games that Parker played he accounted for over 50% of the passing yardage (that's in addition to over 45% of passing TDs). Allen Robinson was no slouch in the yardage department (over 45% of his team's yardage) but was underwhelming on TDs.

I think share of offense is much more prevalent these days compared to raw total to adjust for the overall quality and style of offense. Parker's total stats look less impressive because of his injury but the fact that both he and Robinson have had foot injuries pretty much makes it a wash in terms of injury risk to me.

[Butt Liqueur]

So Robinson's production was very good but I'm talking in terms of share of his offense. In the games that Parker played he accounted for over 50% of the passing yardage (that's in addition to over 45% of passing TDs). Allen Robinson was no slouch in the yardage department (over 45% of his team's yardage) but was underwhelming on TDs.

I think share of offense is much more prevalent these days compared to raw total to adjust for the overall quality and style of offense. Parker's total stats look less impressive because of his injury but the fact that both he and Robinson have had foot injuries pretty much makes it a wash in terms of injury risk to me.

Wouldn't it be important to consider the teams they played too then? The ACC vs. the Big 10?
Penn State and Louisville only had a one common opponent in each 2012 and 2013 (Temple and UCF).
Taking stats just from those games gives you the following stat lines (seems to be the simplest way to compare the guys)

D. Parker - 2 rec, 52 yds, 1 TD, 338 team passing yds, 15.4% of passing yardage - Temple (2012)
D. Parker - 5 rec, 66 yds, 1 TD, 341 team passing yds, 19.4% of passing yardage - UCF (2013)
D. Parker - 7 rec, 118 yds, 2 TD, 679 team passing yds, 17.4% of passing yardage

A. Robinson - 5 rec, 82 yds, 1 TD, 318 team passing yds, 25.8% of passing yardage - Temple (2012)
A. Robinson - 9 rec, 143 yds, 1 TD, 262 team passing yds, 54.6% of passing yardage - UCF (2013)
A. Robinson - 14 rec, 225 yds, 2 TD, 580 team passing yds, 38.8% of passing yardage

It just starts to look a little ridiculous when you begin to boil the stats down like this. I have no problem with people having their said opinion and value on a player. It's when something is stated as fact (e.g. "production"), the definition of which conveniently fits a carefully modified viewpoint, that things get shady.

I haven't watched enough tape on Parker to form an opinion on him yet, but I seem to recall him catching a ton of lob balls from Teddy (I could be way wrong). Without having watched adequate tape on the guy (Parker), I'm probably not even in a very good position to be joining this discussion. Just trying to add another viewpoint and have a civil debate

[TommyL31]

So Robinson's production was very good but I'm talking in terms of share of his offense. In the games that Parker played he accounted for over 50% of the passing yardage (that's in addition to over 45% of passing TDs). Allen Robinson was no slouch in the yardage department (over 45% of his team's yardage) but was underwhelming on TDs.

I think share of offense is much more prevalent these days compared to raw total to adjust for the overall quality and style of offense. Parker's total stats look less impressive because of his injury but the fact that both he and Robinson have had foot injuries pretty much makes it a wash in terms of injury risk to me.

Wouldn't it be important to consider the teams they played too then? The ACC vs. the Big 10?
Penn State and Louisville only had a one common opponent in each 2012 and 2013 (Temple and UCF).
Taking stats just from those games gives you the following stat lines (seems to be the simplest way to compare the guys)

D. Parker - 2 rec, 52 yds, 1 TD, 338 team passing yds, 15.4% of passing yardage - Temple (2012)
D. Parker - 5 rec, 66 yds, 1 TD, 341 team passing yds, 19.4% of passing yardage - UCF (2013)
D. Parker - 7 rec, 118 yds, 2 TD, 679 team passing yds, 17.4% of passing yardage

A. Robinson - 5 rec, 82 yds, 1 TD, 318 team passing yds, 25.8% of passing yardage - Temple (2012)
A. Robinson - 9 rec, 143 yds, 1 TD, 262 team passing yds, 54.6% of passing yardage - UCF (2013)
A. Robinson - 14 rec, 225 yds, 2 TD, 580 team passing yds, 38.8% of passing yardage

It just starts to look a little ridiculous when you begin to boil the stats down like this. I have no problem with people having their said opinion and value on a player. It's when something is stated as fact (e.g. "production"), the definition of which conveniently fits a carefully modified viewpoint, that things get shady.

I haven't watched enough tape on Parker to form an opinion on him yet, but I seem to recall him catching a ton of lob balls from Teddy (I could be way wrong). Without having watched adequate tape on the guy (Parker), I'm probably not even in a very good position to be joining this discussion. Just trying to add another viewpoint and have a civil debate

I was using a player dominator/percentage of offense of their final college seasons and you're using 2 games each over the course of 2 years and I'm the one using a carefully modified viewpoint

I'll grant you that I'm essentially comparing Robinson's Junior year to Parker's Senior year so Parker should be more dominant but we're still talking about what a 21 year old senior did so he's not ancient.

[Butt Liqueur]

So Robinson's production was very good but I'm talking in terms of share of his offense. In the games that Parker played he accounted for over 50% of the passing yardage (that's in addition to over 45% of passing TDs). Allen Robinson was no slouch in the yardage department (over 45% of his team's yardage) but was underwhelming on TDs.

I think share of offense is much more prevalent these days compared to raw total to adjust for the overall quality and style of offense. Parker's total stats look less impressive because of his injury but the fact that both he and Robinson have had foot injuries pretty much makes it a wash in terms of injury risk to me.

Wouldn't it be important to consider the teams they played too then? The ACC vs. the Big 10?
Penn State and Louisville only had a one common opponent in each 2012 and 2013 (Temple and UCF).
Taking stats just from those games gives you the following stat lines (seems to be the simplest way to compare the guys)

D. Parker - 2 rec, 52 yds, 1 TD, 338 team passing yds, 15.4% of passing yardage - Temple (2012)
D. Parker - 5 rec, 66 yds, 1 TD, 341 team passing yds, 19.4% of passing yardage - UCF (2013)
D. Parker - 7 rec, 118 yds, 2 TD, 679 team passing yds, 17.4% of passing yardage

A. Robinson - 5 rec, 82 yds, 1 TD, 318 team passing yds, 25.8% of passing yardage - Temple (2012)
A. Robinson - 9 rec, 143 yds, 1 TD, 262 team passing yds, 54.6% of passing yardage - UCF (2013)
A. Robinson - 14 rec, 225 yds, 2 TD, 580 team passing yds, 38.8% of passing yardage

It just starts to look a little ridiculous when you begin to boil the stats down like this. I have no problem with people having their said opinion and value on a player. It's when something is stated as fact (e.g. "production"), the definition of which conveniently fits a carefully modified viewpoint, that things get shady.

I haven't watched enough tape on Parker to form an opinion on him yet, but I seem to recall him catching a ton of lob balls from Teddy (I could be way wrong). Without having watched adequate tape on the guy (Parker), I'm probably not even in a very good position to be joining this discussion. Just trying to add another viewpoint and have a civil debate

I was using a player dominator/percentage of offense of their final college seasons and you're using 2 games each over the course of 2 years and I'm the one using a carefully modified viewpoint

I'll grant you that I'm essentially comparing Robinson's Junior year to Parker's Senior year so Parker should be more dominant but we're still talking about what a 21 year old senior did so he's not ancient.

This was my point exactly. While I didn't know the name of your method, it's still a pretty specific way of achieving an endpoint, as was mine. However, I was expanding upon their Robinson's statistical production (or lack thereof). The point of the two game comparison was to say "these two guys played in different offenses and in different conferences, so the closest comparison we can make between them is the two games where they played the same team in the same season".I think it's kind of foolish to just say "Throw receptions and receiving yard totals out the window and let's just look at % of a team's receiving yards in the games they played in. Oh yeah, at TDs too"

Again, I haven't watched more than 2 games of Parker's tape, so maybe I'll see something I really like, but I still don't buy the whole "Parker was the more productive player" argument. Maybe I'm just getting caught up in semantics and that's not really what you meant to say? Or maybe it is what you meant to say and we just disagree.

[TommyL31]

This was my point exactly. While I didn't know the name of your method, it's still a pretty specific way of achieving an endpoint, as was mine. However, I was expanding upon their Robinson's statistical production (or lack thereof). The point of the two game comparison was to say "these two guys played in different offenses and in different conferences, so the closest comparison we can make between them is the two games where they played the same team in the same season".I think it's kind of foolish to just say "Throw receptions and receiving yard totals out the window and let's just look at % of a team's receiving yards in the games they played in. Oh yeah, at TDs too"

Again, I haven't watched more than 2 games of Parker's tape, so maybe I'll see something I really like, but I still don't buy the whole "Parker was the more productive player" argument. Maybe I'm just getting caught up in semantics and that's not really what you meant to say? Or maybe it is what you meant to say and we just disagree.

Yeah, sounds like we might be arguing semantics at this point. I should have been more clear when I said "production" as Parker was injured last year. And as I'd mentioned before I can understand someone preferring Robinson over Parker (Robinson has shown his skill at the pro level, came out a year younger, Parker's situation is still unknown, some may view Parker as injury prone).

I would encourage you to continue to watch tape on Parker. I'd be surprised if more than 20% of objective observers who've watched both thought that Robinson was more talented.

[DynoScout]

I've watched everything I can on both and I will stand in that 20% camp that believes Robinson>Parker.
That said, I can't belittle anyone that prefers Parker.

From my chair, they both have to grow as technicians. In their release of the LOS neither shows enough refined hands/shoulder technique, instead relying on athleticism and size to release. In selling their routes, both need to come off the line with more urgency and longer strides to get the defender to flip their hips.
I give the edge to Robinson because he's got a year under his belt, looked like he belonged against NFL defenses, and I think he's a better football player today. Flash forward a year and Parker could easily pass him if he goes to a similar (or better) situation and shows the technical improvements I thought I saw from Robinson his rookie year.

In summary, I like Parker a lot, I just like Robinson a liiiiiiiiiiiiiiittle bit more.

[Tsunami]

I think a lot of people forget how good he was before he got injured. He had 48 catches in 10 games, which would have been around 77 catches in 16 games. That puts him in the neighborhood of Watkins and Matthews rookie seasons, pretty good. He is a very important part of the JAX passing game and is a popular target of Bortles. Just look at Bortles numbers from weeks 10-16, he completely falls off from where he started. Putting Robinson into this year's draft class knowing what I know now he would be top 4, but I am not a fan of this year's class.

He caught a lot of balls because Blackmon was suspended and Lee, Shorts, Lewis, and Harbor were all injured. He didn't really outplay any of them to earn his spot, he barely outplayed Hurns. Sometimes having a lot of catches isn't a sign of talent, it's a sign of availability. If you project Robinson's numbers out to 120 targets he easily got outplayed by Watkins and Matthews. You can't just compare rookies based on play time, you have to look at their effectiveness. If Watkins was on the Jaguars suddenly I don't think Robinson is Bortles "popular target".