Donte Moncrief

[kearly]

I hated Lockette until he started showing up on specials. His speed was making a difference a couple of times a year as a reciever, but was making a difference twice a game on specials.

I agree on the sentiment 100%. I would only differ slightly in that Lockett has not caught enough passes in the NFL to fairly judge him, and he's had some huge catches away from his body, including a big one in XLVIII.

I watch Moncrief and I feel like I am watching Lockette, both with route running and with body catching.

In general I am less concerned with the body catching label than most. Our QB throws the most catchable football in the league. Golden Tate and Doug Baldwin are frequently guilty of body catching especially on contested red zone throws (IIRC), yet they so rarely drop passes because they arrive softly.

As far as the route running, Moncrief still produces, netting something like 85 yards a game. Lockette had fewer than 2 catches a game in college playing a level of competition that was several tiers lower than what Moncrief faced in the cellar of the SEC. There's obviously an ingredient here that is missing in the comparison, because I just can't see any way that Lockette would put up good numbers in that situation, he couldn't even put up numbers at Fort Valley State. Which is even more amazing when you consider the unbelievable physical talent advantage he had at such a level of football.

And personally, my abstract senses do not see the comparison by the eyeball test yet, but I admit I haven't seen enough. Moncrief plainly looks more natural than Lockette. If I had to compare any high profile prospect to Lockette via the eyeball test, I'd go with Brandon Coleman. Lanky, doesn't fight for the football, awkward. Where he differs is mismatch potential, and right now Seattle needs to find more mismatch type talents.

As far as Field Gulls goes, I would never compare two players strictly on measurables. I could just as easily compare Moncrief to Dez Bryant with such an approach.

 

[Scottemojo]

I hated Lockette until he started showing up on specials. His speed was making a difference a couple of times a year as a reciever, but was making a difference twice a game on specials.

I agree on the sentiment 100%. I would only differ slightly in that Lockett has not caught enough passes in the NFL to fairly judge him, and he's had some huge catches away from his body, including a big one in XLVIII.

I watch Moncrief and I feel like I am watching Lockette, both with route running and with body catching.

In general I am less concerned with the body catching label than most. Our QB throws the most catchable football in the league. Golden Tate and Doug Baldwin are frequently guilty of body catching especially on contested red zone throws (IIRC), yet they so rarely drop passes because they arrive softly.

As far as the route running, Moncrief still produces, netting something like 85 yards a game. Lockette had fewer than 2 catches a game in college playing a level of competition that was several tiers lower than what Moncrief faced in the cellar of the SEC. There's obviously an ingredient here that is missing in the comparison, because I just can't see any way that Lockette would put up good numbers in that situation, he couldn't even put up numbers at Fort Valley State. Which is even more amazing when you consider the unbelievable physical talent advantage he had at such a level of football.

And personally, my abstract senses do not see the comparison by the eyeball test yet, but I admit I haven't seen enough. Moncrief plainly looks more natural than Lockette. If I had to compare any high profile prospect to Lockette via the eyeball test, I'd go with Brandon Coleman. Lanky, doesn't fight for the football, awkward. Where he differs is mismatch potential, and right now Seattle needs to find more mismatch type talents.

As far as Field Gulls goes, I would never compare two players strictly on measurables. I could just as easily compare Moncrief to Dez Bryant with such an approach.

Body catching is not that big a deal. Unless we are talking about high draft capital.
Standard caveat. I am no expert on personnel. I categorize receivers as a handful of types. Difference maker fast guy, JAFG (just another fast guy), short area quick guy, post up big guy, JABG (just another big guy).

Is Lockette just like Moncrief? Clearly not. Is there anything about Moncrief that makes me think he is one of those players that will command extra attention from a corner AND safety with great regularity? There is where he shares similarity with Lockette. I watch Moncrief ans see a guy who won't make an opposing secondary lose sleep. Unlike Beckham JR, who I watch and see opposing secondaries really really worried about how to stop him and Harvin at the same time.

So while I don't have a problem with Moncrief as a player, I would really hate to spend a 32nd pick on him. Any comparisons to Lockette are mostly from the effect he would have on game planning from a defensive coordinator's viewpoint.

 

[ImTheScientist]

I hated Lockette until he started showing up on specials. His speed was making a difference a couple of times a year as a reciever, but was making a difference twice a game on specials.

I agree on the sentiment 100%. I would only differ slightly in that Lockett has not caught enough passes in the NFL to fairly judge him, and he's had some huge catches away from his body, including a big one in XLVIII.

I watch Moncrief and I feel like I am watching Lockette, both with route running and with body catching.

In general I am less concerned with the body catching label than most. Our QB throws the most catchable football in the league. Golden Tate and Doug Baldwin are frequently guilty of body catching especially on contested red zone throws (IIRC), yet they so rarely drop passes because they arrive softly.

As far as the route running, Moncrief still produces, netting something like 85 yards a game. Lockette had fewer than 2 catches a game in college playing a level of competition that was several tiers lower than what Moncrief faced in the cellar of the SEC. There's obviously an ingredient here that is missing in the comparison, because I just can't see any way that Lockette would put up good numbers in that situation, he couldn't even put up numbers at Fort Valley State. Which is even more amazing when you consider the unbelievable physical talent advantage he had at such a level of football.

And personally, my abstract senses do not see the comparison by the eyeball test yet, but I admit I haven't seen enough. Moncrief plainly looks more natural than Lockette. If I had to compare any high profile prospect to Lockette via the eyeball test, I'd go with Brandon Coleman. Lanky, doesn't fight for the football, awkward. Where he differs is mismatch potential, and right now Seattle needs to find more mismatch type talents.

As far as Field Gulls goes, I would never compare two players strictly on measurables. I could just as easily compare Moncrief to Dez Bryant with such an approach.

Body catching is not that big a deal. Unless we are talking about high draft capital.
Standard caveat. I am no expert on personnel. I categorize receivers as a handful of types. Difference maker fast guy, JAFG (just another fast guy), short area quick guy, post up big guy, JABG (just another big guy).

Is Lockette just like Moncrief? Clearly not. Is there anything about Moncrief that makes me think he is one of those players that will command extra attention from a corner AND safety with great regularity? There is where he shares similarity with Lockette. I watch Moncrief ans see a guy who won't make an opposing secondary lose sleep. Unlike Beckham JR, who I watch and see opposing secondaries really really worried about how to stop him and Harvin at the same time.

So while I don't have a problem with Moncrief as a player, I would really hate to spend a 32nd pick on him. Any comparisons to Lockette are mostly from the effect he would have on game planning from a defensive coordinator's viewpoint.

Are you watching Moncrief with your eyes closed?

 

[Scottemojo]

Are you watching Moncrief with your eyes closed?

Why yes. In fact, I have found it best to learn all I can about prospects from radio broadcasts of games.

Why don't you actually add something. Tell me why Moncrief is a better prospect than Beckham Jr.

 

[kearly]

Body catching is not that big a deal. Unless we are talking about high draft capital.
Standard caveat. I am no expert on personnel. I categorize receivers as a handful of types. Difference maker fast guy, JAFG (just another fast guy), short area quick guy, post up big guy, JABG (just another big guy).

Is Lockette just like Moncrief? Clearly not. Is there anything about Moncrief that makes me think he is one of those players that will command extra attention from a corner AND safety with great regularity? There is where he shares similarity with Lockette. I watch Moncrief ans see a guy who won't make an opposing secondary lose sleep. Unlike Beckham JR, who I watch and see opposing secondaries really really worried about how to stop him and Harvin at the same time.

So while I don't have a problem with Moncrief as a player, I would really hate to spend a 32nd pick on him. Any comparisons to Lockette are mostly from the effect he would have on game planning from a defensive coordinator's viewpoint.

Well said. I agree with pretty much everything you said, but I would add one argument in Moncriefs favor, in that I think he's a guy worth fearing in the open field with the ball in his hands. On the run he reminds me a little of Demaryius Thomas. If he develops into a complete receiver, safeties will definitely fear him for what he can do after the catch. Lockette will usually follow a catch by falling down, so I think that's a pretty big difference. Anyway, I should shut up. I'm basing my opinions on highlights.

 

[pcbball12]

I watched 5 of Moncrief's games before the combine so I did not have it in my mind what kind of athlete he was. I will briefly jot down my notes on him from those games.

-Not great at any one thing, but good at most
-Shows some acceleration when he gets the ball in his hands
-Makes some tough catches, pretty reliable hands
-Routes aren't crisp, sometimes even lazy
-Doesn't look to be going full speed a lot of the time
-Not super quick, but big/thick body makes it tough for one guy to bring him down

My final impression was a guy that was kind of just meh. He looks like he will be a decent player, but not a difference maker in my opinion. It really bothered me that he seemed to take routes off and just didn't go full speed all the time. Obviously the athleticism is there going by combine numbers, but those numbers didn't match up with what I saw on the field. I am going to go back and watch for the first time after the combine and see if I come away with a different impression knowing what kind of athlete he is.

 

[hawknation2014]

Incredible athlete. 6'2, 220 with a sub-4.40 40 and 39.5 vertical. Are you kidding me?

The depth of this WR class is just sick. It reminds me of last year's RB class. If they get a linemen at 32, there should be at least one very good WR left at 64.

 

[pcbball12]

Just watched him again. Liked him a little better this time for whatever reason. Athleticism shows up more than I initially thought. I guess it is an effortless type of athleticism. Still see questionable effort on certain plays and routes not run at 100%. Would be ok with him at 64 (not in love with it), but not with 32.

 

[ivotuk]

I really don't like this guy. For some reason he reminds me of Mardy Gilyard. Mediocre talent, no passion for the game itself, and not a football player. And what's the constant celebrating about? You caught the ball, so what? I wouldn't want him anywhere near this team.

Martavis Bryant on the other hand I love! Adjusts well to the ball, grabs it out of the air in traffic, can put it away when he's going down. I wonder how good this guy can be out from under Watkins shadow?

 

[Attyla the Hawk]

I'm so torn on Bryant. Is he a late bloomer? Or just a guy who got fortunate for a short stretch and is just a hot mess?

I understand why he'd want to go. I mean with Boyd's departure it would make it difficult to raise his draft stock next year. And players want to get their rookie deals out of the way immediately.

Obviously from a physical standpoint, he's impressive. Size, speed etc. The light seemed to come on late in the year. Not a lot to go on. We drafted a similar player over 20 years ago who turned out ok (Cortez Kennedy). If he'd come out as a junior, his profile would have even been worse.

He seems like a #64 guy to me. His testing will add a ton of hype. I'd be pretty confident he'd still be on the board mid third round. The draft is pretty deep and when you start looking at who could be going in the second -- it's pretty likely he slides. So he could be in a pool of players in a trade back scenario.

 

[Mtjhoyas]

I'm not sure how you can compare him to Mardy Gilyard. Gilyard was rail thin and wasn't very fast. Moncrief is a specimen who runs really fast. I respect you not liking him as a prospect, but I think calling him a mediocre talent is a bit hyperbole. Mediocre production, perhaps?

This isn't solely directed at you, but I don't understand how people can say, "this guy has no passion for the game." How do any of us know? What is your basis for this type of claim? Does statistical production imply passion?

By the way, this is not meant to be combative, I'm just curious how people can make a claim regarding someone's passion for the game.

Lastly, like you, I do really like Martavis Bryant, but technically the same claims you make about Moncrief could be applied to Bryant.

I really don't like this guy. For some reason he reminds me of Mardy Gilyard. Mediocre talent, no passion for the game itself, and not a football player. And what's the constant celebrating about? You caught the ball, so what? I wouldn't want him anywhere near this team.

Martavis Bryant on the other hand I love! Adjusts well to the ball, grabs it out of the air in traffic, can put it away when he's going down. I wonder how good this guy can be out from under Watkins shadow?

 

[Recon_Hawk]

I really don't like this guy. For some reason he reminds me of Mardy Gilyard. Mediocre talent, no passion for the game itself, and not a football player. And what's the constant celebrating about? You caught the ball, so what? I wouldn't want him anywhere near this team.

Martavis Bryant on the other hand I love! Adjusts well to the ball, grabs it out of the air in traffic, can put it away when he's going down. I wonder how good this guy can be out from under Watkins shadow?

Funny how people perceive things. Not that you're wrong, but I actually felt Moncrief displayed quite a bit of passion from watching his tape. Granted like Mtjhoyas said, it's very hard to actually know this kind of stuff, but I thought his celebrations were a good sign of that. Specifically in one of the tapes I watch, him blocking his corner into the endzone resulting in a near TD, you could tell he was excited about out-muscling his man on the play. Just seems like a great block is not something many receivers get excited about unless there is passion.

 

[General Manager]

Moncrief is exactly the type of X WR they need.

 

[Lady Talon]

And what's the constant celebrating about? You caught the ball, so what? I wouldn't want him anywhere near this team.

But wouldn't he be drafted to replace the guy who got in trouble with his ball spinning celebrations after every catch?

 

[theENGLISHseahawk]

Watched four more Ole Miss games today.

Man this guy is frustrating.

Just should be better than he shows on tape.

 

[QuahHawk]

Watched four more Ole Miss games today.

Man this guy is frustrating.

Just should be better than he shows on tape.

DO you think QB play has anything to do with it? I could see how having an inept QB would be frustrating. I think Wilson could make many receivers look better than they really are. Not saying we need to draft Moncrief but I think he'd show much better with a QB like Wilson.