- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Cooks Pick Revisited
Posted on 3/6/15 at 11:07 am to Weekend Warrior79
Posted on 3/6/15 at 11:07 am to Weekend Warrior79
quote:
So we shouldn't have Cooks or Stills, and should have drafted Benjamin & Corey Fuller?
Stills was a 5th round pick. He's lagniappe.
0
Posted on 3/6/15 at 11:14 am to Noplacelikehome
Well if Fuller was gone at 14, if we hypothetically traded up that high it should have been for Mosley not Fuller.
The Cooks pick will be an awesome pick. I do think we had bigger needs(CB and cover LB which are still two of our biggest 3 needs) but Cooks and Stills is an awesome young combo of receivers and Jimmy covers the big man role.
The Cooks pick will be an awesome pick. I do think we had bigger needs(CB and cover LB which are still two of our biggest 3 needs) but Cooks and Stills is an awesome young combo of receivers and Jimmy covers the big man role.
This post was edited on 3/6/15 at 11:16 am
Posted on 3/6/15 at 11:17 am to bonethug0108
It's always worth pointing out that the Cardinals took John Brown with the pick we threw in to trade up. So far he is comparable to Cooks, so the first round pick we gave to the Cardinals is the real lagniappe.
Posted on 3/6/15 at 11:21 am to lsutigers1992
Cooks is going to be better in the end(let's not forget he got hurt right when he was coming on). We just spread the ball around so much. That is perhaps why the pick isn't worth it. Same with drafting a first round HB but having 2-3 other guys he has to share the load with.
With the way we spread the ball around we really should only go defense or OL in the first 3 rounds unless we know a guy will be all pro.
With the way we spread the ball around we really should only go defense or OL in the first 3 rounds unless we know a guy will be all pro.
Posted on 3/6/15 at 11:27 am to bonethug0108
Just looked it up and Cooks had 5 more receptions in 6 less games and we didn't start us in him as a deep threat until a couple of games before he got hurt.
If he had stayed on the pace he got on you're looking at about 80-90 catches for over 1000 yards and likely at least 8 tds.
But if he stays healthy this year we'll get to see for sure.
If he had stayed on the pace he got on you're looking at about 80-90 catches for over 1000 yards and likely at least 8 tds.
But if he stays healthy this year we'll get to see for sure.
Posted on 3/6/15 at 11:30 am to Midget Death Squad
quote:
I really don't understand much that happened last season regarding decisions and play calling, and this was one of them. were they worried about giving him too much in his rookie season?
No one told Payton that Cooks could run 10+ yard routes until midway through the season.
Posted on 3/6/15 at 11:33 am to bountyhunter
quote:
To be honest, I didn't see much of Payton's offensive genius last year
Play calling will always be deemed shity when their is constant interior pressure
Posted on 3/6/15 at 11:34 am to THRILLHO
Pretty much. 
I think it may have been more a combo of shite pass protection and Payton trying to use him like Sproles on the short routes.
I was glad to see them finally open it up before he went down though. Hi promise for next year.
Cooks and Stills are going to be a great combo.
I think it may have been more a combo of shite pass protection and Payton trying to use him like Sproles on the short routes.
I was glad to see them finally open it up before he went down though. Hi promise for next year.
Cooks and Stills are going to be a great combo.
Posted on 3/6/15 at 11:34 am to Midget Death Squad
quote:
wasn't even targeted but a handful of times.
Wasn't he near the top of the NFL in receptions for a good bit?
Posted on 3/6/15 at 11:36 am to TigerBait1127
For rookies. Not sure about overall but he did finish with 53 catches in just 10 games.
Posted on 3/6/15 at 11:39 am to LSUlefty
quote:
That's not the point. There's nothing wrong necessarily with shorter WR's, I just prefer my short QB to throw to taller WR's.
We were going for a quick and fast WR that can create separation off the LOS.
We had Colston, Graham, and To .
for the big receiver role. 
Posted on 3/6/15 at 11:41 am to LSUlefty
quote:
but my concern was a short QB throwing to a short WR
Posted on 3/6/15 at 11:44 am to King George
They had no issues connecting on 53 passes in only 10 games last year.
Posted on 3/6/15 at 11:49 am to bonethug0108
Going into the bye week, Cooks was 10th in the NFL in receptions and had the 8th highest Catch % when targeted
After Week 11, the week he was injured, he was 16th in receptions and 4th in catch % when targeted
After Week 11, the week he was injured, he was 16th in receptions and 4th in catch % when targeted
This post was edited on 3/6/15 at 11:52 am
Posted on 3/6/15 at 11:54 am to TigerBait1127
Yup he caught almost everything thrown his way. He has huge hands for his size. That was something that wasn't talked about much. I think he had maybe one drop?
Posted on 3/6/15 at 11:56 am to bonethug0108
He dropped that deep TD vs Green Bay. Only one I can remember
Posted on 3/6/15 at 11:58 am to TigerBait1127
Let's squash this stupid "short qb to short wr" nonsense right now. It doesn't matter how tall or short the WR is in regards to the height of the QB. The QB's lack of height is effected by three things: the height of the DL, the OL ability to create throwing lanes and the QB ability to maneuver in the pocket to open up those lanes. It's fricking dumb to say this other shite about short WR.
this lends credence to my point. We would see one game where he would be targeted 9 times, and then the next game or two he would get 2 each. I am using arbitrary numbers here, but this was the problem. Paeyton has a tendency to overthing matchups and thus forget to use his playmakers based on these matchups he tries to create
quote:
Going into the bye week, Cooks was 10th in the NFL in receptions and had the 8th highest Catch % when targeted
After Week 11, the week he was injured, he was 16th in receptions and 4th in catch % when targeted
this lends credence to my point. We would see one game where he would be targeted 9 times, and then the next game or two he would get 2 each. I am using arbitrary numbers here, but this was the problem. Paeyton has a tendency to overthing matchups and thus forget to use his playmakers based on these matchups he tries to create
Posted on 3/6/15 at 12:00 pm to TigerBait1127
Apparently he dropped one against Cleveland too but I don't remember it. That's PFF and sometimes they are harsh with what they call drops.
Posted on 3/6/15 at 12:40 pm to Midget Death Squad
He had 2 games with 3 targets: Carolina where we ran a lot, and Detroit
But I do agree that we seemed to go away from him. Our offense definitely felt it when he went out
But I do agree that we seemed to go away from him. Our offense definitely felt it when he went out
This post was edited on 3/6/15 at 12:41 pm
Posted on 3/6/15 at 1:04 pm to Weekend Warrior79
We coulda gotten the same player in Jarvis Landry without using a first rounder. Never liked the pick.
Page 2 of 4
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News