Pick #69, Tyler Lockett, WR/KR/Gunner, KSU

[theincrediblesok]

The NFL and college football are two different things. The DBs that play in college may not even end up playing football, and they are for more savvy and athletic. Many of the DBs Lockett played will not end up even playing in the NFL. He will not enjoy some of the advantages he had in college.

You mean like last year where rookie WRs on pass happy teams were getting 1k yards like it was water against NFL caliber DBs.

Again, each situation is different --- you cannot make broad statements like that and apply it to every rookie. It is a fact that the NFL, and college games are different, and the level of competition is much higher in the NFL. Scheme also plays a huge part. Despite last year many rookie wide receivers do not do very well their first year, or they just have mediocre careers. What really needs to be evaluated is the particular player in questions skillset, and how it transitions to the NFL. I think Lockett will have a good career, but I never think he will become a 1000 yard receiver, nor do I think he'll be an elite receiving threat. He will be a specialist wide receiver that has the potential for big play ability. He is also convenient because he will potentially fill four different roster spots as kick returner, punt returner, gunner and wide receiver.

If he becomes a receiving threat then I will happily eat crow, but I don't think he will be much of a force on offense this year. I also do not think he will ever be anything more than a good slot receiver in the NFL.

Ok fair enough

 

[mikeak]

Here is another difference - Tate does not get much separation

Seattle plays "turnover free" football. That means that where Brady / Rodgers etc would elect to throw the ball to Tate RW will not. We can discuss separately if that is RW, PC or a combination of both but fact remains - separation is more important for Seattle WRs than on many other teams.

Lockett gets separation - that is what we will appreciate this coming year. I am giddy just thinking about a healthy Richardsson, Graham and Lockett

 

[theincrediblesok]

Here is another difference - Tate does not get much separation

Seattle plays "turnover free" football. That means that where Brady / Rodgers etc would elect to throw the ball to Tate RW will not. We can discuss separately if that is RW, PC or a combination of both but fact remains - separation is more important for Seattle WRs than on many other teams.

Lockett gets separation - that is what we will appreciate this coming year. I am giddy just thinking about a healthy Richardsson, Graham and Lockett

Tate got some pretty good separation when he was here, it's just that when it comes to one on one vs a DB, Wilson trust Tate to win those jump balls when it was called for it. The problem is that when we needed Kearse to be that guy it didn't work out quite as well. In 2013 we had a really good WR tandem with Tate and Baldwin. Once it was Baldwin and Kearse you see the huge drop off.

 

[onanygivensunday]

Tyler Lockett is who Seattle really wanted when they drafted Paul Richardson.

Go compare production and measurables. Lockett's the more athletic of the two... and Richardson became effective in shorter routes last year before tearing his ACL. There is no reason to believe that Lockett will not contribute immediately imo.

Drafting Lockett does so much for the Hawks, even in 2015. He's a 4-down special teamer (replaces Jeremy Lane on the punt and kickoff teams, and replaces Walters on the punt and kickoff return teams... and he replaces Richardson on 4-WR sets.

Given all that opportunity and based on total yards, Lockett could definitely be in contention for Offensive ROY.

And Lockett and Wilson appear to be two peas in the same pod... overachievers due to hard work and dedication to their craft. It will be fun to see them develop rapport with one another.

It could be VERY special.

 

[theincrediblesok]

Tyler Lockett is who Seattle really wanted when they drafted Paul Richardson.

Go compare production and measurables. Lockett's the more athletic of the two... and Richardson became effective in shorter routes last year before tearing his ACL. There is no reason to believe that Lockett will not contribute immediately imo.

Drafting Lockett does so much for the Hawks, even in 2015. He's a 4-down special teamer (replaces Jeremy Lane on the punt and kickoff teams, and replaces Walters on the punt and kickoff return teams... and he replaces Richardson on 4-WR sets.

Given all that opportunity and based on total yards, Lockett could definitely be in contention for Offensive ROY.

And Lockett and Wilson appear to be two peas in the same pod... overachievers due to hard work and dedication to their craft. It will be fun to see them develop rapport with one another.

It could be VERY special.

They got 3 players in one who plays on almost every down besides defense. That's the most underrated part about him, I mean he has got a lot of playing time, with all that running you think he would be worn out by the 3rd quarter but nope he keeps on going. His conditioning must be great.

I agree that we drafted Another Wilson as a WR, both wore the number 16 in college

 

[DJrmb]

I don't understand people that say Lockett is not similar to Golden Tate at all. An exact clone? No. Of course they are going to be their own players, no two people are exactly alike but Lockett to me is a tiny bit less physical (but still physical), and more polished version of Golden Tate.

Does Lockett not remind you of Tate in the clip above, at least a little bit?




Also Lockett is a lot more physical a player than he gets credit for. Again, not as physical as Golden Tate, but he won a good amount of jump-balls and contested catches in college and doesn't go down as easily as a lot of receivers. He's said he loves to block and get physical in the run game, and he's also a gunner on punts.

 

[HuskerHawk]

The biggest things I see in Lockett that remind me of Tate are 1)size profile and body type 2) ability to win contested balls against bigger corners, in the red zone and red line. I think Lockett has more legit homerun speed, but I think Tate is quite a bit better running after the catch. I keep seeing TL compared to Antonio Brown, but I think a more apt comparison is TY Hilton. IMO, he will definitely be able to contribute on the outside, working the hashes. He'll lull you to sleep on comeback routes then burn you on what has to be one of the best double moves around. I can about guarantee we'll see at least one deep shot a game with him on a double move.

 

[mikeak]

The biggest things I see in Lockett that remind me of Tate are 1)size profile and body type 2) ability to win contested balls against bigger corners, in the red zone and red line. I think Lockett has more legit homerun speed, but I think Tate is quite a bit better running after the catch. I keep seeing TL compared to Antonio Brown, but I think a more apt comparison is TY Hilton. IMO, he will definitely be able to contribute on the outside, working the hashes. He'll lull you to sleep on comeback routes then burn you on what has to be one of the best double moves around. I can about guarantee we'll see at least one deep shot a game with him on a double move.

Tate must be one of the most prolific after the catch players there is in the league. It is usually good but can sure remember a few times he went backwards

With that said - I rather see a guy get open, get 10 yards, get a few YAC than not get open as much and not get the ball as often but have a much higher YAC

 

[Sgt. Largent]

The biggest things I see in Lockett that remind me of Tate are 1)size profile and body type 2) ability to win contested balls against bigger corners, in the red zone and red line. I think Lockett has more legit homerun speed, but I think Tate is quite a bit better running after the catch. I keep seeing TL compared to Antonio Brown, but I think a more apt comparison is TY Hilton. IMO, he will definitely be able to contribute on the outside, working the hashes. He'll lull you to sleep on comeback routes then burn you on what has to be one of the best double moves around. I can about guarantee we'll see at least one deep shot a game with him on a double move.

His college coach said Lockett's more of a Percy Harvin type, but with far more polished route running skills.

Tate is thick and bowlegged, which helps him bounce off people and break tackles.

 

[formido]

Actually I think we drafted him because more teams are going big CB, they don't have the FS to do what we do but are doing what they can to emulate a lot of what we do, in fact I heard a lot of people say that some CB's drafted are Safety Converts for that coverage reason deep.

Having said all that, Pete knows our weakness, he also knows that having a Lockette to exploit it on other teams will be a boon for us. Lockette may not have outside size but he can run it as well as Richardson and get deep on the Bigger CB's with a Jimmy taking the double off and doing the seam or crossing pattern.

Tyler Lockett is not the type of guy that does well against physical DBs, and bigger guys. In college he struggled with defenders that got physical against him. In the NFL he's going to struggle going against some of the more physical DBs in the game. A major weakness of his is going against press coverage. This is one of the reasons why I believe that he is more suited to playing the slot position, and why I don't think he's going to take Kearse's job on the outside any time soon.
<...>

Kansas State's coach was on the radio yesterday:

"I dare you to come up and press him man to man"

I think some sources online are just assuming he has trouble with press because he's small. Maybe saw a couple successful presses and confirmation bias kicked in. Fact is, Lockett faced press week in and week out and was still 40% of Kansas State's passing offense. And that's 40% of a passing offense on a school that was highly ranked at some points, not Paul Richardson's Colorado.

Lockett is going to beat press in the NFL with the same skills he displayed in college, exquisite footwork and subterfuge. It would be bizarre if he couldn't beat press with the gifts he has. If 6th rounder Antonio Brown can do it, with worse athleticism and pedigree, assuming Lockett can't is just strange.

As for the "he hasn't faced NFL dbs" point made later in this thread, Lockett faced future NFL DBs and he ate them up. In this video, he humiliates this year's first round pick Jason Verett for an uncontested TD.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JjJoSeQxAa0

Nothing about that was luck. Lockett made that play from start to finish. Hard to watch it and can conclude Lockett is limited at the next level.

 

[Lithium]

I am the biggest Golden Tate fan ever since he was a Freshman at ND and I can't help but see some of him in Lockett, more than any other WR I've seen since Tate came in to the league. Obviously you can't get an exact match to Tate or anyone else but I bet our FO thought "We missed Tate last year, lets find another guy like him this year"

 

[therealjohncarlson]

I am the biggest Golden Tate fan ever since he was a Freshman at ND and I can't help but see some of him in Lockett, more than any other WR I've seen since Tate came in to the league. Obviously you can't get an exact match to Tate or anyone else but I bet our FO thought "We missed Tate last year, lets find another guy like him this year"

Exactly, and I hope to god this one stays far away from any of Russell's girls

 

[Spin Doctor]

Actually I think we drafted him because more teams are going big CB, they don't have the FS to do what we do but are doing what they can to emulate a lot of what we do, in fact I heard a lot of people say that some CB's drafted are Safety Converts for that coverage reason deep.

Having said all that, Pete knows our weakness, he also knows that having a Lockette to exploit it on other teams will be a boon for us. Lockette may not have outside size but he can run it as well as Richardson and get deep on the Bigger CB's with a Jimmy taking the double off and doing the seam or crossing pattern.

Tyler Lockett is not the type of guy that does well against physical DBs, and bigger guys. In college he struggled with defenders that got physical against him. In the NFL he's going to struggle going against some of the more physical DBs in the game. A major weakness of his is going against press coverage. This is one of the reasons why I believe that he is more suited to playing the slot position, and why I don't think he's going to take Kearse's job on the outside any time soon.
<...>

Kansas State's coach was on the radio yesterday:

"I dare you to come up and press him man to man"

I think some sources online are just assuming he has trouble with press because he's small. Maybe saw a couple successful presses and confirmation bias kicked in. Fact is, Lockett faced press week in and week out and was still 40% of Kansas State's passing offense. And that's 40% of a passing offense on a school that was highly ranked at some points, not Paul Richardson's Colorado.

Lockett is going to beat press in the NFL with the same skills he displayed in college, exquisite footwork and subterfuge. It would be bizarre if he couldn't beat press with the gifts he has. If 6th rounder Antonio Brown can do it, with worse athleticism and pedigree, assuming Lockett can't is just strange.

As for the "he hasn't faced NFL dbs" point made later in this thread, Lockett faced future NFL DBs and he ate them up. In this video, he humiliates this year's first round pick Jason Verett for an uncontested TD.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JjJoSeQxAa0

Nothing about that was luck. Lockett made that play from start to finish. Hard to watch it and can conclude Lockett is limited at the next level.

Verett is not an NFL DB yet, in fact we don't know if he'll even be a good player. It's different going against Verett than it is going against Sherman, Revis, etc.

Of course his college coach is going to say nice things about him. I've seen him play, and I've seen him struggle against more physical corners, he was also easy to bump off his route.

Again, those are "gifs" they are highlight plays that show him at his BEST. I doubt he will be able to outjuke corners in the NFL like that.

Again, I don't care about "pedigree", size and 40 times, I care about skillset. Antonio Brown is tiny but he is actually more physical than you would think, has better body control, and he has better hands. He doesn't let corners redirect him, and he is a master at improvising.

And I still don't get why people see Tate in Lockett. Those are only superficial similarities, the way they went about the game is completely different. Tate would bully corners physically, and he looked like a running back after the catch. His route running was not that great, and at least with the Seahawks he was our go to guy in the redzone, and our jumpball specialist. Completely different from what Lockett brings to the table. Lockett takes more of a finesse approach, great at route running, fluid hips, and can start and stop quickly. By comparison Tate is much more stiff. Lockett is more of a technician than Tate ever was, and that is what he relies upon as a receiver.

 

[Spin Doctor]

I don't understand people that say Lockett is not similar to Golden Tate at all. An exact clone? No. Of course they are going to be their own players, no two people are exactly alike but Lockett to me is a tiny bit less physical (but still physical), and more polished version of Golden Tate.

Does Lockett not remind you of Tate in the clip above, at least a little bit?




Also Lockett is a lot more physical a player than he gets credit for. Again, not as physical as Golden Tate, but he won a good amount of jump-balls and contested catches in college and doesn't go down as easily as a lot of receivers. He's said he loves to block and get physical in the run game, and he's also a gunner on punts.

Again, that is just ONE clip. You can't just use one clip and then make broad statements. Yes, he does look similar to Tate there, but most of the time they look like completely different receivers. Tate is slower, and more stiff, and he's also much more physical and in your face. Lockett is more of a finesse receiver that relies on good technique and route running. Tate throws around his body more than Lockett, and he almost looks a bit like Marshawn Lynch when he's going for more yards.

I don't see that comparison at all. Height is the only comparison that I see between the two. He's more like Doug Baldwin than Tate.

 

[theincrediblesok]

I don't understand people that say Lockett is not similar to Golden Tate at all. An exact clone? No. Of course they are going to be their own players, no two people are exactly alike but Lockett to me is a tiny bit less physical (but still physical), and more polished version of Golden Tate.

Does Lockett not remind you of Tate in the clip above, at least a little bit?




Also Lockett is a lot more physical a player than he gets credit for. Again, not as physical as Golden Tate, but he won a good amount of jump-balls and contested catches in college and doesn't go down as easily as a lot of receivers. He's said he loves to block and get physical in the run game, and he's also a gunner on punts.

Again, that is just ONE clip. You can't just use one clip and then make broad statements. Yes, he does look similar to Tate there, but most of the time they look like completely different receivers. Tate is slower, and more stiff, and he's also much more physical and in your face. Lockett is more of a finesse receiver that relies on good technique and route running. Tate throws around his body more than Lockett, and he almost looks a bit like Marshawn Lynch when he's going for more yards.

I don't see that comparison at all. Height is the only comparison that I see between the two. He's more like Doug Baldwin than Tate.

We aren't talking about the physicality more so the way he moves, the way his hips move, if you look at the way they both run in the open field down long stretches they have the same stride except that Lockett is faster. The biggest difference is like you said Tate's more of a in your face gonna get extra yards type of guy that's where they are different but the way they move their hips and cuts and stuff is what is comparable.

 

[theincrediblesok]

He's also does an impression of Kearse lol

[youtube]2E7SZipaJJU[/youtube]

 

[Spin Doctor]

I don't understand people that say Lockett is not similar to Golden Tate at all. An exact clone? No. Of course they are going to be their own players, no two people are exactly alike but Lockett to me is a tiny bit less physical (but still physical), and more polished version of Golden Tate.

Does Lockett not remind you of Tate in the clip above, at least a little bit?




Also Lockett is a lot more physical a player than he gets credit for. Again, not as physical as Golden Tate, but he won a good amount of jump-balls and contested catches in college and doesn't go down as easily as a lot of receivers. He's said he loves to block and get physical in the run game, and he's also a gunner on punts.

Again, that is just ONE clip. You can't just use one clip and then make broad statements. Yes, he does look similar to Tate there, but most of the time they look like completely different receivers. Tate is slower, and more stiff, and he's also much more physical and in your face. Lockett is more of a finesse receiver that relies on good technique and route running. Tate throws around his body more than Lockett, and he almost looks a bit like Marshawn Lynch when he's going for more yards.

I don't see that comparison at all. Height is the only comparison that I see between the two. He's more like Doug Baldwin than Tate.

We aren't talking about the physicality more so the way he moves, the way his hips move, if you look at the way they both run in the open field down long stretches they have the same stride except that Lockett is faster. The biggest difference is like you said Tate's more of a in your face gonna get extra yards type of guy that's where they are different but the way they move their hips and cuts and stuff is what is comparable.

If they're running in the open field with nobody around, sure. As far as skillsets go they don't have very many similarities, they both get things accomplished in vastly different manners. I don't think the way they move their hips, and make their cuts is similar. Lockett has much more finesse here, and is looser in the hips than Tate is. Tate looks more stiff when he's doing things, and he isn't as sudden as Lockett.

 

[theincrediblesok]

I don't understand people that say Lockett is not similar to Golden Tate at all. An exact clone? No. Of course they are going to be their own players, no two people are exactly alike but Lockett to me is a tiny bit less physical (but still physical), and more polished version of Golden Tate.

Does Lockett not remind you of Tate in the clip above, at least a little bit?




Also Lockett is a lot more physical a player than he gets credit for. Again, not as physical as Golden Tate, but he won a good amount of jump-balls and contested catches in college and doesn't go down as easily as a lot of receivers. He's said he loves to block and get physical in the run game, and he's also a gunner on punts.

Again, that is just ONE clip. You can't just use one clip and then make broad statements. Yes, he does look similar to Tate there, but most of the time they look like completely different receivers. Tate is slower, and more stiff, and he's also much more physical and in your face. Lockett is more of a finesse receiver that relies on good technique and route running. Tate throws around his body more than Lockett, and he almost looks a bit like Marshawn Lynch when he's going for more yards.

I don't see that comparison at all. Height is the only comparison that I see between the two. He's more like Doug Baldwin than Tate.

We aren't talking about the physicality more so the way he moves, the way his hips move, if you look at the way they both run in the open field down long stretches they have the same stride except that Lockett is faster. The biggest difference is like you said Tate's more of a in your face gonna get extra yards type of guy that's where they are different but the way they move their hips and cuts and stuff is what is comparable.

If they're running in the open field with nobody around, sure. As far as skillsets go they don't have very many similarities, they both get things accomplished in vastly different manners. I don't think the way they move their hips, and make their cuts is similar. Lockett has much more finesse here, and is looser in the hips than Tate is. Tate looks more stiff when he's doing things, and he isn't as sudden as Lockett.

That I can agree with, Tate has the wide hips and the way he runs is like Marshawn more bottom heavy which is why they were both hard to tackle. Tate had some snazzy spins moves and stiff arms too that I haven't seen any from Lockett yet.

I like this highlight because it also shows he could be a red zone threat as well.

[youtube]FlRS6pmrapU[/youtube]

 

[mikeak]

2.17 mark -- that is the play you run in the superbowl from 1 yard line if you are going to throw.......

 

[ivotuk]

2:07 reminds me of Tate. Defender tries to tackle around the thighs and he breaks loose. Tyler has that impercebtible elusiveness like Golden had too. He doesn't look slippery, doesn't look like he's going to get away, but all of a sudden he's gone.