Calvin Ridley's smallish hands. Pass

[modo]

So the first highlight is an attempt at a one handed catch which he misses then catches in his other hand.

The second one he catches against his body.

There are some good catches in that vid and but a ton of them are against his chest, and quite honestly some looks like he bobbles some that hit his hands first.

Plus wasn't this from like 3 years ago? All his recent highlights show me the same.

Sorry I'm not sold. I am interested to watch his catching at the combine.



Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

It was from 2016......the one handed catch was the same hand......did you actually see some of the plays he makes against contested balls......what were you watching?

Most of his catches are wide open because people have problems covering him.

I don't advocate drafting him 8 but to say he has small hands and is not worth a high pick is just fucking ridiculous.


As fans, you see shit in an over-evaluated scouting report on some draft site and you read into it way too much....

Just watch they guy play and see what he does......does he have ideal or large hands? No. Does it affect his football play? No; don't jack off to scouting reports....use your eyes.


If you want to point to an actual fault for Ridley, look at his abiolity to fight off tough cornerbacks at the line. That is one of his biggest issues. Its not because he has small hands and can't catch. If you stop using your bias and watch that highlight film he can fight and hand catch just fine.

On the heat map post above, it even states this. No where do they talk about his small hands. They even state in their analysis he does not needlessly bring the ball into his chest and it is more of a focus issue....running up field before securing ball...

 

[Bort]

I want to do a breakdown of the film of the top wide receiver prospects this year like I did for quarterbacks last year, and I've already started watching film on some guys, including Ridley.

One thing I will say at this point is that he does have some glaring weaknesses, most notably physical strength. Defensive backs will often overpower him, and he rarely turns bubble screens and short routes into big plays because he does not break tackles and goes down anytime anyone gets a hand on him.

I think the best NFL comp for Ridley is Jeremy Maclin, who is a good player, but not the type of dominant weapon you'd use a top 10 overall draft pick on.

EDIT: Also, his hands are fine, so this thread is kind of stupid, but he does have other weaknesses that would make it total lunacy to use a top 10 overall pick on him.

 

[msadows]

I want to do a breakdown of the film of the top wide receiver prospects this year like I did for quarterbacks last year, and I've already started watching film on some guys, including Ridley.

One thing I will say at this point is that he does have some glaring weaknesses, most notably physical strength. Defensive backs will often overpower him, and he rarely turns bubble screens and short routes into big plays because he does not break tackles and goes down anytime anyone gets a hand on him.

I think the best NFL comp for Ridley is Jeremy Maclin, who is a good player, but not the type of dominant weapon you'd use a top 10 overall draft pick on.

EDIT: Also, his hands are fine, so this thread is kind of stupid, but he does have other weaknesses that would make it total lunacy to use a top 10 overall pick on him.

Yea, always really stupid to use a top 10 pick on a position of glaring weakness, that has no real answers in FA, on the #1 prospect at that position.

 

[modo]

Yea, always really stupid to use a top 10 pick on a position of glaring weakness, that has no real answers in FA, on the #1 prospect at that position.

You use picks based on the best players in the draft with an eye towards need. You don't draft solely on need........insert dead horse gif

In the draft you have to see who else is available and if that player is actually worth that draft slot.

there are options for the Bears at the WR in the offseason. Calvin Ridley is not going to fix all the Bears ills.

 

[Bort]

Yea, always really stupid to use a top 10 pick on a position of glaring weakness, that has no real answers in FA, on the #1 prospect at that position.

Being the best prospect at your position does not automatically make you an elite prospect. Some years there are multiple elite WR prospects. Some years there are none. I wouldn't be surprised if there are no wide receivers taken in the top 20 picks this year.

 

[msadows]

You use picks based on the best players in the draft with an eye towards need. You don't draft solely on need........insert dead horse gif

In the draft you have to see who else is available and if that player is actually worth that draft slot.

there are options for the Bears at the WR in the offseason. Calvin Ridley is not going to fix all the Bears ills.

Albert Wilson? John Brown? Yea, glorified 3's. We went that route last season.

Taking Nelson at #8 is just as stupid as taking Ridley at #8, there are much better players that should be available at #39 playing guard than WR. Ridley, Sutton, and Kirk should all more than likely be gone while one or two of Wynn, Hernandez, and Crosby will most definitely be there at #39.

 

[msadows]

Being the best prospect at your position does not automatically make you an elite prospect because the positional strength of draft classes varies wildly year to year. Some years there are multiple elite WR prospects. Some years there are none. I wouldn't be surprised if there are no wide receivers taken in the top 20 picks this year.

lol, do you know what todays NFL is like?

Quoted.

Kind of like when everyone thought that the highest WR would be taken in the 20's last year, right?

 

[modo]

Albert Wilson? John Brown? Yea, glorified 3's. We went that route last season.

Taking Nelson at #8 is just as stupid as taking Ridley at #8, there are much better players that should be available at #39 playing guard than WR. Ridley, Sutton, and Kirk should all more than likely be gone while one or two of Wynn, Hernandez, and Crosby will most definitely be there at #39.

.....did you just argue against yourself about taking Ridley at 8......i am confused

 

[msadows]

.....did you just argue against yourself about taking Ridley at 8......i am confused

No. I'm stating that at #39 the top 3 Wr's will be gone. Take the best one at #8 even if its overdrafting by 5-7 picks.

Half this board wants nelson, you can more than likely get the 2nd best guard(who just put up 37 reps in the combine yesterday) with our #39 pick.

The other options is taking a raw as **** Edge rusher in Davenport who has even more questionmarks than ridley presents, or taking Denzel Ward(Which I am completely for, but I think we resign fuller/callahan, and fix #2CB in FA with marcus cooper coming back too, so I don't see CB being the pick), or take Tremaine Edmunds(Which depending on who you ask is also a reach, and plays a position we actually have decent talent and depth at).

I'd rather go for the best player available at the biggest position of need. That is Calvin Ridley.

 

[Bort]

lol, do you know what todays NFL is like?

Quoted.

Kind of like when everyone thought that the highest WR would be taken in the 20's last year, right?

That didn't, uh, you know, actually happen...

Every single mock draft I saw had Mike Williams, Corey Davis, and John Ross all going in the top 20.

 

[Da Coach]

Well if you've seen a lot of tape and you say his hands are good then I'll defer to you on that. I just see a ton of highlights where he is wide open on the run and lets the ball come to him and that probably won't happen inn the NFL.

The other thing is his size - pretty thin. I don't hate him but I in any other draft he might be a 2nd rounder imo. I think the Maclin comp is pretty good. Maybe golden Tate who is less injured?

Would much rather get Chark or Cain later on.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

 

[modo]

No. I'm stating that at #39 the top 3 Wr's will be gone. Take the best one at #8 even if its overdrafting by 5-7 picks.

Half this board wants nelson, you can more than likely get the 2nd best guard(who just put up 37 reps in the combine yesterday) with our #39 pick.

The other options is taking a raw as **** Edge rusher in Davenport who has even more questionmarks than ridley presents, or taking Denzel Ward(Which I am completely for, but I think we resign fuller/callahan, and fix #2CB in FA with marcus cooper coming back too, so I don't see CB being the pick), or take Tremaine Edmunds(Which depending on who you ask is also a reach, and plays a position we actually have decent talent and depth at).

I'd rather go for the best player available at the biggest position of need. That is Calvin Ridley.

no to the bolded part.....

over-drafting to fill a need is about one of the worst draft strategies you can have unless you have good to great players at every position....even then you trade down.

 

[msadows]

no to the bolded part.....

over-drafting to fill a need is about one of the worst draft strategies you can have unless you have good to great players at every position....even then you trade down.

So then who would you prefer at #8?

I dont even see it as overdrafting. He is at minimum going #16 to baltimore, He could go to san fran at #9.

 

[Bort]

Well if you've seen a lot of tape and you say his hands are good then I'll defer to you on that. I just see a ton of highlights where he is wide open on the run and lets the ball come to him and that probably won't happen inn the NFL.

The other thing is his size - pretty thin. I don't hate him but I in any other draft he might be a 2nd rounder imo. I think the Maclin comp is pretty good. Maybe golden Tate who is less injured?

Would much rather get Chark or Cain later on.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

I would say that he has good hands, and he reliably and consistently catches passes that are thrown to him accurately, even though he does let the ball get into his body too often. He also does struggle to make contested catches, which I think is mostly a physical strength issue, but he does such a good job at creating separation that he rarely needs to make contested catches (although of course it will be harder to create separation in the NFL, especially in the red zone, and I do not see him being much of a red zone weapon at all in the NFL).

 

[modo]

So then who would you prefer at #8?

I dont even see it as overdrafting. He is at minimum going #16 to baltimore, He could go to san fran at #9.

Frankly, I'd talk Cortland Sutton before Ridley.

This draft is tough to see how it will play out......the whole QB thing will throw this draft into disarray based on free agency

but I'd realistically take


Jackson, Edmunds, Smith, Ward

Frankly, unless Pace loves someone at 8 I see the Bears moving down a few slots.

 

[Runruffshod75]

Frankly, I'd talk Cortland Sutton before Ridley.

This draft is tough to see how it will play out......the whole QB thing will throw this draft into disarray based on free agency

but I'd realistically take


Jackson, Edmunds, Smith, Ward

Frankly, unless Pace loves someone at 8 I see the Bears moving down a few slots.

For the first time ever I can honestly state that this what hope for the most unless Chubb is available at #8. I usually don't care for moving back, but it just seems like there's a flat-line of similar talent from the top of the draft into the top of the of the third round(roughly).

 

[modo]

For the first time ever I can honestly state that this what hope for the most unless Chubb is available at #8. I usually don't care for moving back, but it just seems like there's a flat-line of similar talent from the top of the draft into the top of the of the third round(roughly).

I don't pretend to be a draft guru, but the top of the draft doesn't look that much different from the bottom of the first round.

This draft, with all the QBs could really be strange. I don't see all the QBs going early in the first that many other people see. Maybe I am wrong, but I think teams will value these guys out appropriately and not over-draft them.

 

[Runruffshod75]

I don't pretend to be a draft guru, but the top of the draft doesn't look that much different from the bottom of the first round.

This draft, with all the QBs could really be strange. I don't see all the QBs going early in the first that many other people see. Maybe I am wrong, but I think teams will value these guys out appropriately and not over-draft them.

I thought this for the past two drafts & IMO it appears to stand out even more so each draft, especially this one.

 

[Bearly]

I think that's generally correct but (and it's a big but in every draft) it only takes one or 2 teams to love a guy for him to get overdrafted, especially at QB, and this group is as talented and diverse as last years group where 3 went by 12... maybe more so. Problem with drafts is the consensus part and that QB frenzie gets stronger as April approaches.

 

[bearmick]

People put way too much overthought into physical attributes. I want good football players over good physical specimens.