Brandon Posted April 9, 2008 Posted April 9, 2008 Interesting, what was the real time then? And Larry Fitzgerald ran a 4.63... But man, those 40 times tell everything about a Wide Reciever. "What's that? He can't run a 4.4? Oh, well then he probably can't catch, jump, break tackles, lose defenders, run routes, go over the middle, or take a hit... I mean his game tape in college was great, but a weak 40? Nah... we'll settle for that guy who had one good year in college and did great at the combine..." Oh Vernon Davis, we sadly know ye. Does it matter? Are Malcolm Kelly and Jerry Rice the same person? No. I'm not saying that Kelly won't make it in the NFL. He might. In fact, it would not suprise me if he posts much better times in private workouts between now and the draft. The argument is simply something that grates on my nerves. Every year, somebody gets compared to Jerry Rice or Emmitt Smith just because they ran underwhelming 40s. Well, guess what? Jerry Rice was an exceptional player in many ways, not the least of which was his exceptionally average 4.6 40 time 23 years ago. Malcolm Kelly may turn out to be a great player. But to even begin to argue that he'll beat the odds because one exceptional player did it when many, MANY others didn't, just doesn't make sense to me.
34-78-83 Posted April 9, 2008 Posted April 9, 2008 Based on how he has looked as a Football Player On The Field I say Kelly will be a very useful 2nd round pick now. I don't see any way he would drop past the 2nd round. NFL staffs do not value 40 time as much as many of you seem to think, but Kiper does.
Brandon Posted April 9, 2008 Posted April 9, 2008 Based on how he has looked as a Football Player On The Field I say Kelly will be a very useful 2nd round pick now. I don't see any way he would drop past the 2nd round. NFL staffs do not value 40 time as much as many of you seem to think, but Kiper does. I think that the way they value them is as a cutoff point, after which most players at a given position simply aren't fast enough to play in the NFL. It doesn't mean he won't be drafted (I think he goes in R3-4 if he doesn't improve his times), but that he'll move into the same category as the project guys who have one or more very serious flaws in their game. There may be the odd exception and Kelly may be one, but generally speaking, I think that's how they view it.
K-9 Posted April 9, 2008 Posted April 9, 2008 I seem to remember a medical concern around a certain RB we picked in the second round after every other team passed on him. Based on his college career (the BEST barometer of a player), the fact he's run much better 40 times prior to being hurt, and STILL was considered to have a pretty good pro-day in other areas (like, oh, running routes and CATCHING the ball), I think there's a good chance we take him in the 2nd IF our medical staff deems his injury as one that will heal completely and not nag him the entire year. GO BILLS!!!
San-O Posted April 9, 2008 Posted April 9, 2008 He had horrible 40 times are his workout today. He didnt clock near as well as he should have. Now Chris Brown says he should be there when Buffalo picks at 41 in the 2nd round. Not sure if thats a good thing or a bad thing for Buffalo. I think now if they go WR it will either be Devin Thomas or James Hardy. But with the way Kelly performed today, I think Buffalo goes CB with its first pick. Today Posted By: Chris Brown | Time: 1:46 PM ET | Link KELLY 40 TIMES DISAPPOINTING: Well a lot was riding on Malcolm Kelly's pro day at Oklahoma. Kelly ran twice and clocked in at 4.75 and 4.68 according to NFL.com. Since some of his best times prior were in the mid 4.5s on campus last year, NFL talent evaluators can look at this two ways. One, Kelly must still not be 100 percent healthy or two, he is not first round caliber talent. I thought he had to run at least in the same mid-4.5 range to come off the board in round one. All indications are he performed well in the receiving drills, but those 40 times are going to hurt him. I think he's a second rounder at best, which might not be a bad thing for the Bills if they go corner in round one. There's a good chance now that Kelly is sitting there at 41. --- Buffalo simply CAN'T take a risk on THIS receiver at that spot ( # 11 ) with slow 40 times and coming off an injury. Basically by definition he is not a 1st rounder. Slow and hurt, maybe round 2 or high 3. We'll see. Trade down.
Zulu Cthulhu Posted April 9, 2008 Posted April 9, 2008 Buffalo simply CAN'T take a risk on a receiver at that spot ( # 11 ) with slow 40 times and coming off an injury. Basically by definition he is not a 1st rounder. Slow and hurt, maybe round 2 or high 3. We'll see. Trade down. I don't know...just because Kelly seems no longer viable at #11 does mean that Limas Sweed or (especially) Devin Thomas are not. Thomas, although slightly shorter than Sweed or Kelly, Thomas certainly looks the part of a WR that could come into the NFL and contribute right away: a muscled-up, durable guy in the mold of TO (he's 1 inch shorter than TO, same weight) who has good speed and can go over the middle of the field for us. PLUS! I haven't heard of him beating on any women or anything like that.
Brandon Posted April 9, 2008 Posted April 9, 2008 Buffalo simply CAN'T take a risk on a receiver at that spot ( # 11 ) with slow 40 times and coming off an injury. Basically by definition he is not a 1st rounder. Slow and hurt, maybe round 2 or high 3. We'll see. Trade down. I agree, if he stays around a 4.7, he's in trouble, but despite my rantings in this thread, don't discount the possibility that he could still improve it significantly before the draft and still go 11th. He may have simply had a bad day, or perhaps, as was mentioned in another post, it may have been a slow track. If he runs again at a private workout in a few days and posts a 4.55, all bets are off.
San-O Posted April 9, 2008 Posted April 9, 2008 I don't know...just because Kelly seems no longer viable at #11 does mean that Limas Sweed or (especially) Devin Thomas are not. Thomas, although slightly shorter than Sweed or Kelly, Thomas certainly looks the part of a WR that could come into the NFL and contribute right away: a muscled-up, durable guy in the mold of TO (he's 1 inch shorter than TO, same weight) who has good speed and can go over the middle of the field for us. PLUS! I haven't heard of him beating on any women or anything like that. Sorry. See modified "a" > "this"
Dwight Drane Posted April 9, 2008 Posted April 9, 2008 Buffalo simply CAN'T take a risk on a receiver at that spot ( # 11 ) with slow 40 times and coming off an injury. Basically by definition he is not a 1st rounder. Slow and hurt, maybe round 2 or high 3. We'll see. Trade down. I'm disappointed in the time, but these lyin' eyes still see a top WR in Kelly. It is a real russian roulette situation with him now. He had a confirmed injury, plus injury rumors, plus rumors that he is slow. Did he push himself back to run fast and prove the doubters wrong? If he did, and he wasn't ready, he would have been better sitting out and some team would still grab him in the 1st off of on-field performance. Now he is confirmed slow, there are still injury rumors, and he may have aggrivated his quad. I give him credit for going out there, because I believe that he is a better player than what he showed. Logic says he took a gamble on himself in being fully ready. If you know you are slow, you don't get your bluff called like that. I still think he goes before the 2nd.
tombstone56 Posted April 9, 2008 Posted April 9, 2008 He had horrible 40 times are his workout today. He didnt clock near as well as he should have. Now Chris Brown says he should be there when Buffalo picks at 41 in the 2nd round. Not sure if thats a good thing or a bad thing for Buffalo. I think now if they go WR it will either be Devin Thomas or James Hardy. But with the way Kelly performed today, I think Buffalo goes CB with its first pick. Today Posted By: Chris Brown | Time: 1:46 PM ET | Link KELLY 40 TIMES DISAPPOINTING: Well a lot was riding on Malcolm Kelly's pro day at Oklahoma. Kelly ran twice and clocked in at 4.75 and 4.68 according to NFL.com. Since some of his best times prior were in the mid 4.5s on campus last year, NFL talent evaluators can look at this two ways. One, Kelly must still not be 100 percent healthy or two, he is not first round caliber talent. I thought he had to run at least in the same mid-4.5 range to come off the board in round one. All indications are he performed well in the receiving drills, but those 40 times are going to hurt him. I think he's a second rounder at best, which might not be a bad thing for the Bills if they go corner in round one. There's a good chance now that Kelly is sitting there at 41. --- tried to warn you,,,his agentis going to wet himself ,especially after posting a letter saying "how fit and ready he is"
Jerry Jabber Posted April 9, 2008 Posted April 9, 2008 Buffalo simply CAN'T take a risk on THIS receiver at that spot ( # 11 ) with slow 40 times and coming off an injury. Basically by definition he is not a 1st rounder. Slow and hurt, maybe round 2 or high 3. We'll see. Trade down. We have enough speedy WR's already, it's time to add size & strength. Speed didn't matter in the game vs the Browns in a snowstorm. Having a big WR in snowy conditions that can jump and out muscle defenders will matter.
John from Riverside Posted April 9, 2008 Posted April 9, 2008 The thing that bothers me regarding Kelly is that he took all the extra time in preparing and still ran sub par 40 yard times......you would think his agent would be all over that making sure the conditions were ideal (he would have a agent since he is entering the draft right?) as those 40 times equal money at this point...... Also.....I know 40 times are largely overrated (20 times are actually more important) but I am tellin you right now.....it makes me nervious that a player who has been projected to us and is going to make a boatload of money on that first contract BARELY runs a better forty then my 16 year old son (4.85) and my son doesn't even play on offense where that speed is crucial.....and I know there is a hight and weight difference at this point (6'4 220 as apposed to 6' 180) but by more leg strenghth along Kelly should be able to generate a better 40 time then that. Is Malcolm Kelly going to go the same way as that USC wide reciever a while back. On a side note I feel bad for him anyway......that time is going to cost him a lot of money.
34-78-83 Posted April 9, 2008 Posted April 9, 2008 I think that the way they value them is as a cutoff point, after which most players at a given position simply aren't fast enough to play in the NFL. It doesn't mean he won't be drafted (I think he goes in R3-4 if he doesn't improve his times), but that he'll move into the same category as the project guys who have one or more very serious flaws in their game. There may be the odd exception and Kelly may be one, but generally speaking, I think that's how they view it. I think Kelly is actually faster than 4.75. The injury he is rehabbing from is likely still a factor in his 40 time. I think NFL teams know that he is faster than that based on his play against other top schools.
2020 Our Year For Sure Posted April 9, 2008 Posted April 9, 2008 Let this open the door to the player we should take. Derrick Harvey.It's all about pass rush and we ain't got one.
Brandon Posted April 9, 2008 Posted April 9, 2008 I think Kelly is actually faster than 4.75. The injury he is rehabbing from is likely still a factor in his 40 time. I think NFL teams know that he is faster than that based on his play against other top schools. I think that he probably is too, perhaps siginificantly faster, but if he wants to reclaim his draft position, I think he has to prove it. The knock on him all along has been speed and separation ability. He did nothing but magnify those concerns today.
mary owen Posted April 9, 2008 Posted April 9, 2008 40 times....ha! year after year, countless GM's and Scouts tell us that 40's are overrated (ESPECIALLY IF WE ARE TALKING ABOUT .3 SECONDS), and yet here we are, year after year, placing 40 times under 4.5 as the highest degree of performance evaluation. Tell me, how many people can tell the difference between .43 and .75? If you can't run a good route, can't get seperation to beat press coverage, and you can't catch the damn ball, don't have good balance, can't see all that well, are a pu$$y who's afraid to take a hit, then what good does a blink of an eye do ya? If the 4.43 is so much better than say 4.60, why the hell isn't Roscoe Parrish having a better year than Wes Welker in 07? enough with the 40 stuff.
Brandon Posted April 9, 2008 Posted April 9, 2008 40 times....ha! year after year, countless GM's and Scouts tell us that 40's are overrated (ESPECIALLY IF WE ARE TALKING ABOUT .3 SECONDS), and yet here we are, year after year, placing 40 times under 4.5 as the highest degree of performance evaluation. Tell me, how many people can tell the difference between .43 and .75? If you can't run a good route, can't get seperation to beat press coverage, and you can't catch the damn ball, don't have good balance, can't see all that well, are a pu$$y who's afraid to take a hit, then what good does a blink of an eye do ya? If the 4.43 is so much better than say 4.60, why the hell isn't Roscoe Parrish having a better year than Wes Welker in 07? enough with the 40 stuff. Yet at the same time, the scouts and GMs continue to sit in the stands at the combine for hours, stopwatches in hand. Meanwhile, NFL owners continue spending tens of thousands of dollars flying those same scouts to dozens of campus workouts. Its not all important, but it IS important. And as for .3 of a second, well, consider the range your talking about. The average kid off the street can probably run a 40 in 5 flat.
JM57 Posted April 9, 2008 Posted April 9, 2008 Yet at the same time, the scouts and GMs continue to sit in the stands at the combine for hours, stopwatches in hand. Meanwhile, NFL owners continue spending tens of thousands of dollars flying those same scouts to dozens of campus workouts. Its not all important, but it IS important. And as for .3 of a second, well, consider the range your talking about. The average kid off the street can probably run a 40 in 5 flat. Your average high school football player can run a 5 flat. I know on my team the only ones who didn't were the REAL big kids who played line but never saw the field because A)they were so slow and B) they were so out of shape
Brandon Posted April 9, 2008 Posted April 9, 2008 Your average high school football player can run a 5 flat. I know on my team the only ones who didn't were the REAL big kids who played line but never saw the field because A)they were so slow and B) they were so out of shape It was the same on my HS team as well. The point, of course, is that the difference between a pro football player and a bum off the street is suprisingly small...about half a second. In that context, a .3 difference is absolutely enormous.
mary owen Posted April 9, 2008 Posted April 9, 2008 Yet at the same time, the scouts and GMs continue to sit in the stands at the combine for hours, stopwatches in hand. Meanwhile, NFL owners continue spending tens of thousands of dollars flying those same scouts to dozens of campus workouts. Its not all important, but it IS important. And as for .3 of a second, well, consider the range your talking about. The average kid off the street can probably run a 40 in 5 flat. i didn't say it wasn't important, i said the difference between 4.3 and 4.7 is OVERRATED in it's importance.
Recommended Posts