skinny21 Posted June 21, 2017 Share Posted June 21, 2017 @MartinCI'm seeing Grant as a lock too - not because of the praise he's received from Gruden (though that helps his chances), but because of his ST prowess and versatility. Harris I have as a borderline sure thing - good height and hands and the game never seemed to big for him last year. Helps that he understands the importance of ST. These are the questions I have: Who backs up Crowder? Do they go with 5 receivers (with someone like Davis or Pascal on the PS)? If they keep 6, who wins between Quick, Davis and the UDFAs (again, like Pascal)? As of right now, my answers are - Grant, they keep 6 (and probably 1 on the PS), and Davis makes the team (Quick is too expensive for a 6th receiver and doesn't seem to be much of a ST guy). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reaper Skins Posted June 21, 2017 Share Posted June 21, 2017 3 hours ago, skinny21 said: Who backs up Crowder? My guess would be Grant due to playbook familiarity. Although I wonder whether Chris Thompson could fill in at this spot as well? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
illone Posted June 21, 2017 Share Posted June 21, 2017 Pryor Doc Crowder 3 locks to make the roster, right?! Lots of uncertainty with the rest... My guess would be Harris, Davis, and Quick thus giving the Skins the tallest WR corps ever assembled that I know of... Grant is decent, but don't think he makes it this time around. Quick is superior and replaces Grant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RandyHolt Posted June 22, 2017 Share Posted June 22, 2017 My dark horse candidate to backup Crowder in the slot is Harris. He seems not cut from the waterbug mold but I read he can play slot. For as much as Gruden loves Grant, it seems like Harris also gets love. Grant has the early lead based on vet status and of course teams work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Conn Posted June 22, 2017 Share Posted June 22, 2017 Does Grant even play the slot? Its like an entirely different position, just like slot CB is on the other side of the ball. I only remember Grant lining up out wide (mostly on running plays of course). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peregrine Posted June 22, 2017 Share Posted June 22, 2017 With the way Gruden has been talking him up again, Grant has to make the roster. Would be downright silly otherwise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
XxSpearheadxX Posted June 22, 2017 Share Posted June 22, 2017 Quick is not making this roster. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Audible_Red40 Posted June 22, 2017 Share Posted June 22, 2017 20 hours ago, skinny21 said: As of right now, my answers are - Grant, they keep 6 (and probably 1 on the PS), and Davis makes the team (Quick is too expensive for a 6th receiver and doesn't seem to be much of a ST guy). If I'm not mistaken, I think Grant's cap hit is more than Quick's cap hit, so if that was the case, this logic is no good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goskins10 Posted June 22, 2017 Share Posted June 22, 2017 20 hours ago, skinny21 said: @MartinCI'm seeing Grant as a lock too - not because of the praise he's received from Gruden (though that helps his chances), but because of his ST prowess and versatility. Harris I have as a borderline sure thing - good height and hands and the game never seemed to big for him last year. Helps that he understands the importance of ST. These are the questions I have: Who backs up Crowder? Do they go with 5 receivers (with someone like Davis or Pascal on the PS)? If they keep 6, who wins between Quick, Davis and the UDFAs (again, like Pascal)? As of right now, my answers are - Grant, they keep 6 (and probably 1 on the PS), and Davis makes the team (Quick is too expensive for a 6th receiver and doesn't seem to be much of a ST guy). Brian Quick - Cap hit $695,000 Ryan Grant - Cap hit $743,403 Not sure I understand this statement. Grant costs more than Quick and more importantly the minimum is $465,000. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moondog Posted June 22, 2017 Share Posted June 22, 2017 21 hours ago, skinny21 said: @MartinC These are the questions I have: Who backs up Crowder? Do they go with 5 receivers (with someone like Davis or Pascal on the PS)? If they keep 6, who wins between Quick, Davis and the UDFAs (again, like Pascal)? If everyone is healthy then we should almost never go more than three receivers on the field with Reed and Davis being better than our #4 receiver. But I get your point if someone gets hurt. I can't stand Ryan grant but I think he's the most obvious choice of who would fill in at slot since he apparently "knows" the position (or how to fall down at every spot on the field). But more to the point if Crowder was hurt the offense would certainly change and instead of someone filling his role we would just shift to feature Doctson Pryor and Reed more and we'd probably see a lot more two receiver two tight end looks til he came back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinny21 Posted June 22, 2017 Share Posted June 22, 2017 2 hours ago, Audible_Red40 said: If I'm not mistaken, I think Grant's cap hit is more than Quick's cap hit, so if that was the case, this logic is no good. 1 hour ago, goskins10 said: Brian Quick - Cap hit $695,000 Ryan Grant - Cap hit $743,403 Not sure I understand this statement. Grant costs more than Quick and more importantly the minimum is $465,000. Well, first off, I said he's too expensive as the 6th receiver. Now, I didn't know his cap hit was quite that low (thanks for the info!), but if Grant is the #4 backing up all 3 positions, it's not really worth comparing their salaries. I also said "and doesn't seem much of a ST guy". My bad for not being more clear, but I was including that in the expense. Overall though, I take your guy's points - his salary isn't much of a factor. 1 hour ago, moondog said: If everyone is healthy then we should almost never go more than three receivers on the field with Reed and Davis being better than our #4 receiver. But I get your point if someone gets hurt. I can't stand Ryan grant but I think he's the most obvious choice of who would fill in at slot since he apparently "knows" the position (or how to fall down at every spot on the field). But more to the point if Crowder was hurt the offense would certainly change and instead of someone filling his role we would just shift to feature Doctson Pryor and Reed more and we'd probably see a lot more two receiver two tight end looks til he came back. I'm not quite sure what you mean about not playing more than 4 receivers? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Audible_Red40 Posted June 22, 2017 Share Posted June 22, 2017 Personally, I'd rather roll with Quick more than Grant. But that's like saying I'd rather date the prettier of the ugly girls. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RandyHolt Posted June 22, 2017 Share Posted June 22, 2017 I will be fine with Grant if our plays are not telegraphed every time he is in the game, and if he does not fall down making a cut, the one time per game he gets his number called. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goskins10 Posted June 22, 2017 Share Posted June 22, 2017 35 minutes ago, skinny21 said: Well, first off, I said he's too expensive as the 6th receiver. Now, I didn't know his cap hit was quite that low (thanks for the info!), but if Grant is the #4 backing up all 3 positions, it's not really worth comparing their salaries. I also said "and doesn't seem much of a ST guy". My bad for not being more clear, but I was including that in the expense. Overall though, I take your guy's points - his salary isn't much of a factor. Kind of my point... I still would prefer Quick over Grant. I like Grant and he is a good locker room guy. But he has trouble getting open. Some of that is lack of targets. Some of that is play selection. Who knows we are running when Grant is put in? Wait. I know this one....... But at least Quick has had a season where he caught some passes. Last year he caught more passes than Grant has his entire 3 yr career. Quick is also a very good blocker like Grant. If I have my choice between a guy that can catch balls more regularly or a guy who plays STs, I am taking the pass catcher every time. Yoi can find other guys to paly STs. Having said that, if they keep Grant over Quick I will not be as upset as some. As I said he is a great locker room guy. Coaches need those guys, even if they are not the most productive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinny21 Posted June 22, 2017 Share Posted June 22, 2017 @goskins10Right... but "not worth comparing their salaries" is because they'd have very different roles (if my impression is correct). I wasn't (the one) comparing Quick's salary to Grant because I had Grant as the #4 and Quick fighting for #6. So, I was assuming (my bad) Quick would easily be more expensive than whoever else might be fighting for the #6 spot - Davis, Pascal or whoever. Overall though, I agree with your point. I mean, who knows, Quick could be our #3 (playing outside in 3 receiver sets). He's shown some decent production in the NFL. Hasn't lived up to his draft position, but that's hardly our problem. Judging by coaches comments and ST play (as well as comfort in the system and with Kirk) though, I have Quick fighting others for the #6. Assuming Grant and Harris both stick and play ST, you're right that it might not matter how able Quick is to play teams. With the little info I have, I think I'd prefer keep a young guy over Quick, but it doesn't really matter much to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goskins10 Posted June 22, 2017 Share Posted June 22, 2017 38 minutes ago, skinny21 said: @goskins10Right... but "not worth comparing their salaries" is because they'd have very different roles (if my impression is correct). I wasn't (the one) comparing Quick's salary to Grant because I had Grant as the #4 and Quick fighting for #6. So, I was assuming (my bad) Quick would easily be more expensive than whoever else might be fighting for the #6 spot - Davis, Pascal or whoever. Overall though, I agree with your point. I mean, who knows, Quick could be our #3 (playing outside in 3 receiver sets). He's shown some decent production in the NFL. Hasn't lived up to his draft position, but that's hardly our problem. Judging by coaches comments and ST play (as well as comfort in the system and with Kirk) though, I have Quick fighting others for the #6. Assuming Grant and Harris both stick and play ST, you're right that it might not matter how able Quick is to play teams. With the little info I have, I think I'd prefer keep a young guy over Quick, but it doesn't really matter much to me. Lot's a different topics there - lol. Ok, I get your intent was you thought Quick's salary would be more than someone else. Think we are now both aligned there. Salary is low no matter where he is on the depth chart. It at least read to me the discussion was Quick or Grant. I stand by may statement that for me I prefer Quick. As for Quick vs "younger players" - I assume you mean like Harris or Davis. It depends. I see Quick as someone with NFL experience that can be insurance for Doctson. We know he can at least keep people honest so they can't just always focus on Pryor. That also keeps Crowder mostly in the slot where he is most dangerous. Not sure they want to trust that role to a rookie or even Grant. Although it's sounding like Gruden wants to give grant a chance. Anyway, I want to see how they do in TC and PS before coming ot any of those conclusions. Quick may develop a really great rapport with Kirk - or one of the others might. You just never know till they get on the field. I like going young when possible but not just for the sake of going young. As for STs, that's strictly a tie breaker. They will keep the guy that help them in the offense first. If it's close, then and only then will STs come into play. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinny21 Posted June 22, 2017 Share Posted June 22, 2017 Mostly agree with everything here. Really, I'm just putting down my impressions, I'm with you about leaving conclusions till TC. If they keep a 6th receiver, I do think that ST ability may be weighed heavier than you think... but what do I know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Koolblue13 Posted June 23, 2017 Share Posted June 23, 2017 I really dont have much of an opinion on the Grant/Quick thing, but I'd take Grant. Grown up on the system, outstanding blocker and teams player. Im hoping Harris shows something and Davis blows it up, which is far more interesting to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peregrine Posted June 23, 2017 Share Posted June 23, 2017 On 6/18/2017 at 4:53 AM, Koolblue13 said: It gets you wins. Thats what the reward is. If you expect Doctson to come in and post 7+ TD, then fine, but Decker gets in the endzone A LOT. Double digit TD totals in half his seasons before last year. That is extremely impressive. We have a bunch of guys on OYDs, expiring contracts and one very important one on a tag. This might be our best shot at a post season run for a while. Short term wins at the cost of long term dominance has been our problem for 25 years. 11 wins this year is not as valuable as 8 this year, and 11 for the next 3 years in a row. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Koolblue13 Posted June 23, 2017 Share Posted June 23, 2017 12 minutes ago, Peregrine said: Short term wins at the cost of long term dominance has been our problem for 25 years. 11 wins this year is not as valuable as 8 this year, and 11 for the next 3 years in a row. Being a good team ensures losing the next? A rookie WR has to be thrown into a full time starting role right away or he'll never improve? Are you implying Grant would be a star, if he wasn't stuck behind Garcon? Should we have cut Garcon when we drafted Grant? Did signing Pryor hurt the team? Those answers are all No, right? How does signing another slot WR represent everything wrong with our organization for 25 years? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joeken24 Posted June 23, 2017 Share Posted June 23, 2017 I must say, I am not impressed with what I see out of Grant. My thought is that he is probably an outstanding practice guy. Its actually what I believe Gruden is alluding to when he's talking about how Grant runs good routes and at the right depth. I remember a Redskins WR by the name of Taylor Jacobs. Great practice guy; hard worker; good special team's guy; but not effective on game day at the WR position at all. I have yet to see Grant create separation in his routes. This make him a liability in the passing game. He also had a few too many drops for my taste. Just doesn't strike me as a guy that has that dog needed to make plays at this level. Particularly, if he is an every down wide out. Not a threat at all in my book. He also seems to fall a lot. Can't figure it, other than to chalk it up to game day jitters. If any of you have ever had game day jitters, you know exactly what I mean. Getting too jacked up (game day jitters) can cause depth perception problems when you're trying to catch the ball, causing drops. Jitters affects your footing, causing you to fall or slip. Saw all of that with Grant. Relax young fella! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoCalMike Posted June 23, 2017 Share Posted June 23, 2017 The WR core excites me and scares me at the same. I think they have the potential to be lethal, but there is also a chance that one or more of the signings under-perform and aren't much of a factor. Remember when we signed Brandon Lloyd? Then Andre Roberts? Miscalculations do happen. Pryor is young and strong and has all the physical attributes, but being completely honest his sample size is so small that we don't know his true upside until he gets more real game time in. Plenty of WR's with his physical attributes have flamed out after flashing potential due to other factors. Crowder gonna Crowder, not worried about him at all. He is a beast and will thrive at whatever he is asked to do. I actually think Doctson is sort of the forgotten man. If his injury is truly gone and doesn't "flare up" randomly, I think he is the one that is going to turn heads. There is a reason he turned heads and was drafted so high. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Renegade7 Posted June 23, 2017 Share Posted June 23, 2017 Honestly, every time I come in here, I feel a little bit worse about it. Preseason can't get here fast enough. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moondog Posted June 23, 2017 Share Posted June 23, 2017 21 hours ago, skinny21 said: I'm not quite sure what you mean about not playing more than 4 receivers? We have three very good receivers and two very good tight ends. Thus we are unlikely to see many formations with more than three receivers and if we do have spread formations it likely will still be three receivers and then tight ends to keep the best players on the field. If one of our too three receivers got hurt I don't think we'd see a ton of grant or quick but likely our game plan would change to feature the tight ends more. It's just about utilizing your best players. Realistically the only time we should see receivers outside of Pryor Doctson and crowder is if one of them needs a breather. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peregrine Posted June 24, 2017 Share Posted June 24, 2017 On 6/22/2017 at 8:59 PM, Koolblue13 said: Being a good team ensures losing the next? A rookie WR has to be thrown into a full time starting role right away or he'll never improve? Are you implying Grant would be a star, if he wasn't stuck behind Garcon? Should we have cut Garcon when we drafted Grant? Did signing Pryor hurt the team? Those answers are all No, right? How does signing another slot WR represent everything wrong with our organization for 25 years? Way to use a straw man fallacy, take the general un-denied business principle of short term cost for the sake of long term success, and then abuse it in absurdities. So signing Decker to take the spot of your 1st round draft pick who you now wont get to see for 2 years is the same as 5th round rarely played Ryan Grant taking Garcons spot? Thats ridiculous. Youve managed to prove your point to yourself and make yourself look silly to everyone else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.