Henry Ruggs is Much More Than Speed

[skinfanjon]

Hey OP- that was a great post. Need to look more closely at him. He kinda seems like a turbo charged Darius Slayton, which I like Slayton so that's meant as a compliment. Does that sound like a reasonable comp?

The production stuff doesnt bother me at all. Just looking at the tape, he seems like a really straight line athlete. Not a lot of wiggle or lateral agility but obviously has incredible top end speed. I dont see the my ball mentality or alpha persona...dont see Josh Doctson either but something in the middle. Got any thoughts on that?

Not a bad comp but Ruggs is way more advanced in ability to track the ball and Ruggs hands are vastly better. I do like Slayton pretty well myself.

Ruggs is not close to a straight line athlete. He is a far more advanced route runner than many realize. His tape doesn't lie. His lateral agility is elite, its just that he is so in control of his body it is very subtle.

The fact he shows up in really big games shows his alpha persona as you say.

The reality that he had 1 dropped pass in college should cover any "MY Ball" misgivings.

I would say his receiving skill set is far more advanced than Tyreek Hill's coming into the draft. Of course Hill was a RB in college. I would recommend watching Hill's 2018 - 2019 KC highlights and compare those routes and catches to Ruggs Highlights.

Think you will be surprised at the similarities. Ruggs is actually smoother out of his breaks and many scouts have to be drooling like a few coordinators thinking of ways to utilize his blazing speed.

Awesome thanks. I will check that out and look closer.

[Jigga94]

That's a very subjective statement, said with absolute certainty as if its objective fact.

Was it impacted? What about the players shared the field with other top prospects in the history of the NCAA? We can't say for certain it was impacted. Typically the best players get the ball the most often.

Does he have a high skill/ability? That seems to be subjective as well- I'm not aware of a better way to objectively measure skill and ability other than what he scores poorly in. It's an honest question. If there is then I'd be interested to see it. 40 yard dash times dont move the needle for me. John Ross was fast too (FTR, before people fly off the handle and accuse me of comparing him to Ross, and then go on to list 20 reasons why they are different, I am not comparing the two. Just pointing out that 40 time doesnt mean much, at least to me).

Objectively, players with poor dominator ratings and breakout age, whom are also selected in the 1st round, since 2010, bust at a rate of 82%. I can admit looking at it purely from an objective perspective doesnt tell the whole story. I'm an objective person, so I'm going to gravitate toward that line of thinking. However, the stats are the stats. He could very well be someone who bucks the trend. He seems to possess some of those subjective things that would make that a possibility. I have a better chance selecting someone else. I just think hes bound to go to an NFL situation that puts him in a WR2 or slot role, limiting his fantasy upside; he doesn't profile as an NFL WR1 to me. And it's okay to disagree

Hey not bashing your process or anything here, but can you define bust here again? Was it no top 24 PPR finish at all? Or just 1 season with top 24? Also, would you mind sharing the 18% in that field that are not busts? Do some of those 82% have a solid shot at becoming non-busts? Thanks!

yes, zero top 24 finishes

There are 11 WRs in the last 10 years drafted in the 1st round who had a poor dominator rating and/or breakout age. 2 of those had a top 24 season: Calvin Ridley and Kelvin Benjamin. Neither of them, to date, have had a WR1 season. So its safe to say zero 1st round WRs since 2010 have had a WR1 season and missed on Dominator Rating and/or Breakout Age. Also, both of them only missed on Breakout age. Ruggs misses on both. He would certainly be an anomaly, and the first at least as far back as my data goes (2010).

The good news is his athletic profile is similar to the ONLY drafted WR since 2010 to miss on both Dominator and Breakout age and have at least 1 top 24 season. And that guy is pretty darn impressive. "So you're sayin' theres a chance!"

It's over simplification, and I've already highlighted that analytics dont give the full story, but there are many wrs in his same situation who did not pan out. Last year it was Campbell whom everyone was drooling over. This year it's Ruggs. The analytics may be wrong, but I'll leave it to someone else to take that chance. I dont blame anyone for taking him... his ceiling is pretty big if he hits, I totally get it. I'm somewhat conservative when it comes to picking players... I'd rather take the double than swing for the grand slam.

IMO landing spot matters more for him than any other WR. Those that were projected busts (all, not just 1st rounders), but actually hit were guys who landed in very ideal situations.

To answer your last question:
Marquise Brown
Mike Williams
Corey Coleman
Laquon Treadwell
Kevin White
Tavon Austin
Cordarrelle Patterson
Justin Blackmon
AJ Jenkins

Not to nitpick, but this is why I hate the overly analytic approach. You have Mike Will and Hollywood as busts but KB as a hit. I get that those are the numbers, but I'd be willing to bet that both Williams and Hollywood have a top 24 season before all said and done. Then you only have 7 out of 11 busts which is a 63% rate and still a pretty small sample size either way.

Like I said before, if Ruggs is there in the late 1st like he projects to be, I'll be taking that swing everyday of the week.

[Ice]

100% credibility loss calling a Player like M. Brown a bust who was coming off a major injury yet still managed 7 TD's in just over 12 games as rookie while playing at less than 100%.

[skinfanjon]

Hey OP- that was a great post. Need to look more closely at him. He kinda seems like a turbo charged Darius Slayton, which I like Slayton so that's meant as a compliment. Does that sound like a reasonable comp?

The production stuff doesnt bother me at all. Just looking at the tape, he seems like a really straight line athlete. Not a lot of wiggle or lateral agility but obviously has incredible top end speed. I dont see the my ball mentality or alpha persona...dont see Josh Doctson either but something in the middle. Got any thoughts on that?

Not a bad comp but Ruggs is way more advanced in ability to track the ball and Ruggs hands are vastly better. I do like Slayton pretty well myself.

Ruggs is not close to a straight line athlete. He is a far more advanced route runner than many realize. His tape doesn't lie. His lateral agility is elite, its just that he is so in control of his body it is very subtle.

The fact he shows up in really big games shows his alpha persona as you say.

The reality that he had 1 dropped pass in college should cover any "MY Ball" misgivings.

I would say his receiving skill set is far more advanced than Tyreek Hill's coming into the draft. Of course Hill was a RB in college. I would recommend watching Hill's 2018 - 2019 KC highlights and compare those routes and catches to Ruggs Highlights.

Think you will be surprised at the similarities. Ruggs is actually smoother out of his breaks and many scouts have to be drooling like a few coordinators thinking of ways to utilize his blazing speed.

So, went back and watched some cutups looking for the things you and OP mentioned and came away more impressed. Will be interested to see where he lands but hes moved from the group of WRs I'm fine passing on to my target list.

And, if anyone is interested to see his ridiculous HS basketball tape, check out the link: https://mobile.twitter.com/espn/status/ ... 29?lang=en

Too bad all he could do was dunk haha.

[Johnny B. Goode]

Hey not bashing your process or anything here, but can you define bust here again? Was it no top 24 PPR finish at all? Or just 1 season with top 24? Also, would you mind sharing the 18% in that field that are not busts? Do some of those 82% have a solid shot at becoming non-busts? Thanks!

yes, zero top 24 finishes

There are 11 WRs in the last 10 years drafted in the 1st round who had a poor dominator rating and/or breakout age. 2 of those had a top 24 season: Calvin Ridley and Kelvin Benjamin. Neither of them, to date, have had a WR1 season. So its safe to say zero 1st round WRs since 2010 have had a WR1 season and missed on Dominator Rating and/or Breakout Age. Also, both of them only missed on Breakout age. Ruggs misses on both. He would certainly be an anomaly, and the first at least as far back as my data goes (2010).

The good news is his athletic profile is similar to the ONLY drafted WR since 2010 to miss on both Dominator and Breakout age and have at least 1 top 24 season. And that guy is pretty darn impressive. "So you're sayin' theres a chance!"

It's over simplification, and I've already highlighted that analytics dont give the full story, but there are many wrs in his same situation who did not pan out. Last year it was Campbell whom everyone was drooling over. This year it's Ruggs. The analytics may be wrong, but I'll leave it to someone else to take that chance. I dont blame anyone for taking him... his ceiling is pretty big if he hits, I totally get it. I'm somewhat conservative when it comes to picking players... I'd rather take the double than swing for the grand slam.

IMO landing spot matters more for him than any other WR. Those that were projected busts (all, not just 1st rounders), but actually hit were guys who landed in very ideal situations.

To answer your last question:
Marquise Brown
Mike Williams
Corey Coleman
Laquon Treadwell
Kevin White
Tavon Austin
Cordarrelle Patterson
Justin Blackmon
AJ Jenkins

Not to nitpick, but this is why I hate the overly analytic approach. You have Mike Will and Hollywood as busts but KB as a hit. I get that those are the numbers, but I'd be willing to bet that both Williams and Hollywood have a top 24 season before all said and done. Then you only have 7 out of 11 busts which is a 63% rate and still a pretty small sample size either way.

Like I said before, if Ruggs is there in the late 1st like he projects to be, I'll be taking that swing everyday of the week.

To be fair, yes, they shouldn't be busts yet (although IMO Williams is a bust). I have made a decision not to count busts until 3 years post draft going forward. I didn't mean to count 2019 at the end of the season but it's too much work to erase them now.

KB is a hit because he had 2 top 24 seasons, just as many as Ridley. Why should I count 1 but not the other? Then I am interjecting my own subjective bias into something objective.

And sure, if Brown hits, and let's pretend Williams does too, then that's two more hits. But you're betting that no one else is drafted in the 1st round as an expected bust "before it's all said and done"

Thanks for the comments. I appreciate this discussion

[Johnny B. Goode]

100% credibility loss calling a Player like M. Brown a bust who was coming off a major injury yet still managed 7 TD's in just over 12 games as rookie while playing at less than 100%.

yes, I mistakenly added the 2019 class after the rookie season.My original intent was not to add a class' misses until 3 years out. It felt wrong counting hits but not misses, but I think that's the best way to go to be fair to all.

Brown only misses on Breakout age, but if you take his last juco year into account, he actually has an acceptable breakout age. Depending on what Baltimore does at WR over the next season or two, I expect Brown to hit

[Johnny B. Goode]

I'll addend what I said earlier...

I went through and ranked my order of rookies, and Ruggs came in right around that 1.11 range. If I had a pick at 1.10-1.12 I would consider taking him. No one else in that range has the ceiling that Ruggs has, but they all have the same floor IMO. If I am picking there, I likely earned it so I can take a chance on a high ceiling guy... or I traded for the pick and in that case I likely have multiple firsts so he is a luxury pick at that point.

So I will agree- if I was picking in the late 1st I'd absolutely take that swing. I'm not terrible high on other wrs going in that range, and they certainly dont have the ceiling Ruggs has

[FantasyFreak]

His tape doesn't lie. His lateral agility is elite, its just that he is so in control of his body it is very subtle.

The fact he shows up in really big games shows his alpha persona as you say.

Not trying to pick on you, but wanted to address the statement, which many have made in the past. "His tape doesn't lie".

The tape, doesn't lie, but it doesn't give any definitive answers on the question asked. That's the thing about watching tape, is it is so subjective. 2 people can see different things. You say Ruggs has elite lateral agility, the poster you were responding to doesn't. These type of discrepancies are so common. People cannot definitely say one way or another, IMO. They can simply give their opinion. The idea that the tape doesn't lie suggests that the viewer has absolute ability to watch film and be able to gauge things with complete accuracy. This isn't just you, I hear Mayock say it, and a ton of other people. The term in general I just don't like, because it suggests the viewer is right, and all others who have a different of opinion, aren't.

The alpha personality I have no idea about, but he never asserted himself into an alpha role, and IMO an alpha receiver asserts himself game in game out, as well as the big games, not just having a good game once in a while. I like Ruggs, I think he will be a good NFL player, but I do not share the idea he's the best WR in this class.

[Packerland]

His tape doesn't lie. His lateral agility is elite, its just that he is so in control of his body it is very subtle.

The fact he shows up in really big games shows his alpha persona as you say.

Not trying to pick on you, but wanted to address the statement, which many have made in the past. "His tape doesn't lie".

The tape, doesn't lie, but it doesn't give any definitive answers on the question asked. That's the thing about watching tape, is it is so subjective. 2 people can see different things. You say Ruggs has elite lateral agility, the poster you were responding to doesn't. These type of discrepancies are so common. People cannot definitely say one way or another, IMO. They can simply give their opinion. The idea that the tape doesn't lie suggests that the viewer has absolute ability to watch film and be able to gauge things with complete accuracy. This isn't just you, I hear Mayock say it, and a ton of other people. The term in general I just don't like, because it suggests the viewer is right, and all others who have a different of opinion, aren't.

The alpha personality I have no idea about, but he never asserted himself into an alpha role, and IMO an alpha receiver asserts himself game in game out, as well as the big games, not just having a good game once in a while. I like Ruggs, I think he will be a good NFL player, but I do not share the idea he's the best WR in this class.

Who are your top 3 WR's in this draft? I can't recall off the top of my head.

[FantasyFreak]

His tape doesn't lie. His lateral agility is elite, its just that he is so in control of his body it is very subtle.

The fact he shows up in really big games shows his alpha persona as you say.

Not trying to pick on you, but wanted to address the statement, which many have made in the past. "His tape doesn't lie".

The tape, doesn't lie, but it doesn't give any definitive answers on the question asked. That's the thing about watching tape, is it is so subjective. 2 people can see different things. You say Ruggs has elite lateral agility, the poster you were responding to doesn't. These type of discrepancies are so common. People cannot definitely say one way or another, IMO. They can simply give their opinion. The idea that the tape doesn't lie suggests that the viewer has absolute ability to watch film and be able to gauge things with complete accuracy. This isn't just you, I hear Mayock say it, and a ton of other people. The term in general I just don't like, because it suggests the viewer is right, and all others who have a different of opinion, aren't.

The alpha personality I have no idea about, but he never asserted himself into an alpha role, and IMO an alpha receiver asserts himself game in game out, as well as the big games, not just having a good game once in a while. I like Ruggs, I think he will be a good NFL player, but I do not share the idea he's the best WR in this class.

Who are your top 3 WR's in this draft? I can't recall off the top of my head.

I honestly am not coming up with any definitive rankings for the top guys because I have no intention of taking the top guys. They won't be there when I pick in a few leagues, and the picks I have early I will be going QB (SF) and RB. Ruggs would not be my 1, though, gun to my head.

[skinfanjon]

His tape doesn't lie. His lateral agility is elite, its just that he is so in control of his body it is very subtle.

The fact he shows up in really big games shows his alpha persona as you say.

Not trying to pick on you, but wanted to address the statement, which many have made in the past. "His tape doesn't lie".

The tape, doesn't lie, but it doesn't give any definitive answers on the question asked. That's the thing about watching tape, is it is so subjective. 2 people can see different things. You say Ruggs has elite lateral agility, the poster you were responding to doesn't. These type of discrepancies are so common. People cannot definitely say one way or another, IMO. They can simply give their opinion. The idea that the tape doesn't lie suggests that the viewer has absolute ability to watch film and be able to gauge things with complete accuracy. This isn't just you, I hear Mayock say it, and a ton of other people. The term in general I just don't like, because it suggests the viewer is right, and all others who have a different of opinion, aren't.

The alpha personality I have no idea about, but he never asserted himself into an alpha role, and IMO an alpha receiver asserts himself game in game out, as well as the big games, not just having a good game once in a while. I like Ruggs, I think he will be a good NFL player, but I do not share the idea he's the best WR in this class.

Who are your top 3 WR's in this draft? I can't recall off the top of my head.

FWIW, mine are

Lamb
Jeudy
Jefferson

Have Lamb as the clear #1. Jeudy/Jefferson are close for me. Adding Ruggs to a tier with Raegor and Hamler based on this thread, but need to see landing spots and draft capital.

Higgins is a total bust and DND for me.

[PR0v3]

His tape doesn't lie. His lateral agility is elite, its just that he is so in control of his body it is very subtle.

The fact he shows up in really big games shows his alpha persona as you say.

Not trying to pick on you, but wanted to address the statement, which many have made in the past. "His tape doesn't lie".

The tape, doesn't lie, but it doesn't give any definitive answers on the question asked. That's the thing about watching tape, is it is so subjective. 2 people can see different things. You say Ruggs has elite lateral agility, the poster you were responding to doesn't. These type of discrepancies are so common. People cannot definitely say one way or another, IMO. They can simply give their opinion. The idea that the tape doesn't lie suggests that the viewer has absolute ability to watch film and be able to gauge things with complete accuracy. This isn't just you, I hear Mayock say it, and a ton of other people. The term in general I just don't like, because it suggests the viewer is right, and all others who have a different of opinion, aren't.

The alpha personality I have no idea about, but he never asserted himself into an alpha role, and IMO an alpha receiver asserts himself game in game out, as well as the big games, not just having a good game once in a while. I like Ruggs, I think he will be a good NFL player, but I do not share the idea he's the best WR in this class.

The tape doesn’t lie, but people’s interpretations of it do. The same holds true for numbers. Numbers provide no value without a interpretation of their meaning. What is the meaning derived from breakout age or dominator rating? An opinion. The actual number is worthless without a value assessment.

Ultimately, the tape is what is actually happening and is what is most important. Just because it is harder to digest than a number does not mean it isn’t valuable. There are just as many disagreements about what a number means as what one sees on the field. Numbers only tell us what happened in the past, and fantasy football is a projection based game, so there will still be subjective opinions when looking forward whether using tape or numbers.

[FantasyFreak]

His tape doesn't lie. His lateral agility is elite, its just that he is so in control of his body it is very subtle.

The fact he shows up in really big games shows his alpha persona as you say.

Not trying to pick on you, but wanted to address the statement, which many have made in the past. "His tape doesn't lie".

The tape, doesn't lie, but it doesn't give any definitive answers on the question asked. That's the thing about watching tape, is it is so subjective. 2 people can see different things. You say Ruggs has elite lateral agility, the poster you were responding to doesn't. These type of discrepancies are so common. People cannot definitely say one way or another, IMO. They can simply give their opinion. The idea that the tape doesn't lie suggests that the viewer has absolute ability to watch film and be able to gauge things with complete accuracy. This isn't just you, I hear Mayock say it, and a ton of other people. The term in general I just don't like, because it suggests the viewer is right, and all others who have a different of opinion, aren't.

The alpha personality I have no idea about, but he never asserted himself into an alpha role, and IMO an alpha receiver asserts himself game in game out, as well as the big games, not just having a good game once in a while. I like Ruggs, I think he will be a good NFL player, but I do not share the idea he's the best WR in this class.

The tape doesn’t lie, but people’s interpretations of it do. The same holds true for numbers. Numbers provide no value without a interpretation of their meaning. What is the meaning derived from breakout age or dominator rating? An opinion. The actual number is worthless without a value assessment.

Ultimately, the tape is what is actually happening and is what is most important. Just because it is harder to digest than a number does not mean it isn’t valuable. There are just as many disagreements about what a number means as what one sees on the field. Numbers only tell us what happened in the past, and fantasy football is a projection based game, so there will still be subjective opinions when looking forward whether using tape or numbers.

Right, but when people say the tape doesn't lie, "this guy has X", they are now stating their interpretation as fact.

[PR0v3]

Not trying to pick on you, but wanted to address the statement, which many have made in the past. "His tape doesn't lie".

The tape, doesn't lie, but it doesn't give any definitive answers on the question asked. That's the thing about watching tape, is it is so subjective. 2 people can see different things. You say Ruggs has elite lateral agility, the poster you were responding to doesn't. These type of discrepancies are so common. People cannot definitely say one way or another, IMO. They can simply give their opinion. The idea that the tape doesn't lie suggests that the viewer has absolute ability to watch film and be able to gauge things with complete accuracy. This isn't just you, I hear Mayock say it, and a ton of other people. The term in general I just don't like, because it suggests the viewer is right, and all others who have a different of opinion, aren't.

The alpha personality I have no idea about, but he never asserted himself into an alpha role, and IMO an alpha receiver asserts himself game in game out, as well as the big games, not just having a good game once in a while. I like Ruggs, I think he will be a good NFL player, but I do not share the idea he's the best WR in this class.

The tape doesn’t lie, but people’s interpretations of it do. The same holds true for numbers. Numbers provide no value without a interpretation of their meaning. What is the meaning derived from breakout age or dominator rating? An opinion. The actual number is worthless without a value assessment.

Ultimately, the tape is what is actually happening and is what is most important. Just because it is harder to digest than a number does not mean it isn’t valuable. There are just as many disagreements about what a number means as what one sees on the field. Numbers only tell us what happened in the past, and fantasy football is a projection based game, so there will still be subjective opinions when looking forward whether using tape or numbers.

Right, but when people say the tape doesn't lie, "this guy has X", they are now stating their interpretation as fact.

That’s not a tape issue, that’s a people issue. You don’t reject the interpretation by dismissing tape, you reject it by providing tape evidence that contradicts the opinion. If you don’t want to do the work though, that’s fine, but don’t pretend like what is actually happening on the field doesn’t matter.

[FantasyFreak]

The tape doesn’t lie, but people’s interpretations of it do. The same holds true for numbers. Numbers provide no value without a interpretation of their meaning. What is the meaning derived from breakout age or dominator rating? An opinion. The actual number is worthless without a value assessment.

Ultimately, the tape is what is actually happening and is what is most important. Just because it is harder to digest than a number does not mean it isn’t valuable. There are just as many disagreements about what a number means as what one sees on the field. Numbers only tell us what happened in the past, and fantasy football is a projection based game, so there will still be subjective opinions when looking forward whether using tape or numbers.

Right, but when people say the tape doesn't lie, "this guy has X", they are now stating their interpretation as fact.

That’s not a tape issue, that’s a people issue. You don’t reject the interpretation by dismissing tape, you reject it by providing tape evidence that contradicts the opinion. If you don’t want to do the work though, that’s fine, but don’t pretend like what is actually happening on the field doesn’t matter.

I'm not. I'm saying nobody's interpretation of tape is fact. You don't need to provide tape evidence against someone's claim that they see X on tape when they haven't provided any tape evidence to prove it in the first place. Who's got the time for that and what's the point to going to that length when the original statement didn't go to that length in the first place? That's basically saying my time is less valuable than theirs.