When the Raiders were on the clock, with 10 minutes to decide which player to select at No. 12, head coach Jon Gruden and general manager Mike Mayock had their pick of wide receivers. Most suspected Gruden and Mayock would take either Alabama’s Jerry Jeudy or Oklahoma’s CeeDee Lamb. Instead, they opted to go with
Long-time NFL scout provides detailed report on Raiders WR Henry Ruggs III
Thanks for setting this up, Cork – interesting to get a scouts view. Not happy about the DHB comparison as that was a wasted pick although I note the scout was looking at the positive side of things with him!
I have a question for you and all the posters though: what exactly makes up a WR1? There have been quite a few comments that Ruggs isn’t one even though he has speed, good hands and is seen as very smart in football terms. What’s missing from the WR1 profile – route versatility, go-to ability, college experience as a WR1 etc?
Let’s see if we can get a clear definition of what we are measuring against…
That was my initial reaction when the scout brought up DHB. I asked if that was because both played for the Raiders. He said, not at all. And he emphasized the part about liking Heyward-Bey and all the positive attributes he brings. It’s why he’s still in the league, the scout reminded me.
I said from the outset, Ruggs is not DHB. When it comes to catching the ball and the production afterword, there is no comparison. I get what the scout is saying, but I dont see it his way.
As for the #1WR, the criteria can differ from person to person I guess.
Catch the ball. The most important attribute.
Getting open vs great coverage and making the contested catches.
The ability to dominate opposing DBs.
Making big plays in big situations when the game is on the line.
Being able to get that first down or touchdown when the opponent knows the ball is going to you.
The drive to get better even when you are at the top of your game.
Leadership in the WR room.
I think that would be a good start.
Thanks for the input on what makes a WR1, Vet … be interesting to see what else anybody else thinks goes into the mix.
Relieved that Ruggs likely won’t be another “Edward Scissorhands” when it comes to what must be the key skill of catching the ball!
Cheers
Read the comment I just posted to Andy about DHB. The scout loves DHB because of his size, strength, work ethic, speed, special teams ability and being a great teammate. Everyone tends to think just about the dropped passes. Ruggs III won’t be affected by that because of his sure hands.
Ruggs has exceptional hands.
Comparing him to Darius Heyward Bey is a lazy comparison.
Read the other comments I posted, Ghost. The DHB comparison was all positive from the scout’s viewpoint. He loves DHB. Not meant to be a slight in any way, though that tends to be the knee-jerk reaction whenever that name gets mentioned.
Nothing much to like or be impressed about with that scouting report. It pretty much says what i have been saying all along and I’m just a regular joe not an NFL scout. Anybody can watch the games and see what this scout sees.
Ruggs will make big plays from YAC but just like in college, he won’t be a #1 receiver and the Raiders will ultimately still be searching for one at the end of the day. So while I think he makes the Raiders more dynamic on offence, they still need a #1 receiver.
So Nevin, if he is not a WR1, what is he lacking on your list?
Well I think TAV had a pretty good description. The one thing I would add is that #1 receivers usually rise that way naturally due simply to their talent. They just have the “it” factor and they just start to grow into that roll. I think for the most part that college receivers who don’t become #1’s rarely do it in the pros either. They are who they are. But there are exceptions like always.
I do want to be clear that I think Ruggs will help the Raiders offensively and give them much more explosiveness and make them more dynamic. He is a good football player. I just don’t think he will be the #1 receiver.
Thanks Nevin, always good to understand where people are coming from and what they expect. I find sometimes there are terms flying about that I don’t quite get so always appreciate the insight.
Interesting take by the scout on Ruggs. Everyone talking about him as if he is going to be WR1 and our version of Tyreek Hill. But, is Tyreek Hill a WR1? I’m not sure you can answer that affirmatively. I hate to bring this back to the QB, but I also wonder whether DC can utilize a WR1 like that. Seems to me the disconnect between him and Amari Cooper is that Carr would not or could not let routes and plays develop long enough. Not always Carr’s fault, but he is quick to check the ball down at times. Maybe it was a lack of trust with those two that Ruggs and Carr will not have. We will just have to see how it all plays out.
To me, a WR1 has great hands, competes for balls, is an exceptional route runner, finds ways to get open and/or make plays when not open, can go against and be successful against the opposing team’s CB1 or “shutdown” CB, and opens things up for other players when the defense keys on him.
Great point about Tyreke Hill, Michelle. He’s not really a No. 1. Then again, the Chiefs really don’t have a No. 1 receiver in terms of their wide receivers. Maybe that’s what Gruden sees in his offense, that there’s not a need for a true No. 1 if there are enough weapons that a defense can’t key on any one player. That’s probably also why Andy Reid took Clyde Edwards-Helaire in the first round.
Great point, Cork. I think it’s likely the WR1 changes from week to week depending on the opponent and their attack strategy. Gruden schemes our talent into the best position to take advantage, which may mean Ruggs is WR1 one week and Waller is WR1 the next. I think the roles can even change mid-game as schemes are adjusted to react to what the defense is doing. A defense that doesn’t know where the hit is going to come from next is a defense that’s half a step slower.
Correct, Matt. If Gruden can make it to where the defense isn’t sure who the go-to receiver is on a given down or in a particular situation, then, in effect, everyone is a No. 1 receiver. That’s the best of all worlds. It’s what Andy Reid has created with the Chiefs. It’s what the Rams had with Faulk, Proehl, Bruce and Holt, et al.
Thanks to everybody for answering the question I raised about Ruggs specifically and the WR1 role in general.
I forr one am much clearer about what the term might mean now but also thinking about how it might be relevant to our team and whether or not we have or need that guy.
Go Raiders!