Thoughts on Jaylin Lane as a playmaker

There fixed it

When you have unproven and/or marginal talent there always seems to be a lot of discussoin around 'developing' and 'learning' and rationalizations for why player X is 'raw' or a 'project' or has a 'lot of potential'. I feel like sometimes we overthink these things. There are probably 1,000 traits that make a really talented player (be it WR or otherwise) 'talented'. There are the physical attributes but I think almost any player who finds his way onto an NFL roster has basic physical talent to some degree. Some guys just know how to play. Is it instincts? Is it previous experience? Is it having some elite physical traits? Is it an intangible we can't define?

I really don't know. But I believe really good NFL players just know how to play. They instinctively know what it takes to win matchups and beat the opponent. And other guys may be physical specimens in every measureable way but can't produce or be a difference maker no matter who coaches them or how many chances they get.

So while I'm sure there are guys who suddenly turn a corner and it all clicks and they become something special - I think it's more rare than we want to believe. When your roster has a lot of unproven guys with 'potential' you want to believe they all have the ability to become something special. But do they really?

So far, Lane just hasn't shown himself to be a very good WR. Return man? Yes. WR? Not so far.

Boone said:

When you have unproven and/or marginal talent there always seems to be a lot of discussoin around 'developing' and 'learning' and rationalizations for why player X is 'raw' or a 'project' or has a 'lot of potential'. I feel like sometimes we overthink these things. There are probably 1,000 traits that make a really talented player (be it WR or otherwise) 'talented'. There are the physical attributes but I think almost any player who finds his way onto an NFL roster has basic physical talent to some degree. Some guys just know how to play. Is it instincts? Is it previous experience? Is it having some elite physical traits? Is it an intangible we can't define?

I really don't know. But I believe really good NFL players just know how to play. They instinctively know what it takes to win matchups and beat the opponent. And other guys may be physical specimens in every measureable way but can't produce or be a difference maker no matter who coaches them or how many chances they get.

So while I'm sure there are guys who suddenly turn a corner and it all clicks and they become something special - I think it's more rare than we want to believe. When your roster has a lot of unproven guys with 'potential' you want to believe they all have the ability to become something special. But do they really?

So far, Lane just hasn't shown himself to be a very good WR. Return man? Yes. WR? Not so far.

Click to expand...

I think that's true, but maybe with a caveat: I think it's much more true with top-end prospects.

Mid-tier prospects, it can take a couple training camps to develop.

I think the shining example of that on our team is Reeves. He was cut, what, 4 seasons in a row at cut down day and then finally make the team? Now he's a pretty good backup safety and outstanding special teams player.

There are others who come on.

I really think for most guys, you've got to at least watch year 2. Rookie year is a blur for most of them. Then they get a chance to take a breath, full off-season program, and see what they can do in year 2.

And I agree Lane hasn't shown to be a good WR yet. But I do think you have to give a guy a couple years to show whether he can be or not.

Now, top end prospects, I think you can figure out if they're going to be top-end players pretty quickly. 1 season. Conerly is an example of that. He started slow, but finished REALLY strong. Had he not, there would have bee immediate questions about him since he's a first round pick.

I think Special Teams success is different. There are a lot of examples of NFL Special Teams stars who have never really excelled at the positions they played in college. That's because Special Teams is far more about raw speed and agility than it is about specific ability to play a position.

If it weren't for Reaves standing out as a Special Teamer, he would never even have worked his way off the practice squad.

I understand your point - but I'm just challenging the general notion we seem to seize on a lot that players can 'learn' their way into being NFL starters. I'm not sure it's as possible as we like to believe. If it's a nature vs. nurture debate, I'm picking nature about 95% of the time. I'm not arguing guys can't improve - obviously they can. But I think the ability to improve dramatically is much more limited than we want to believe.

Boone said:

I think Special Teams success is different. There are a lot of examples of NFL Special Teams stars who have never really excelled at the positions they played in college. That's because Special Teams is far more about raw speed and agility than it is about specific ability to play a position.

If it weren't for Reaves standing out as a Special Teamer, he would never even have worked his way off the practice squad.

I understand your point - but I'm just challenging the general notion we seem to seize on a lot that players can 'learn' their way into being NFL starters. I'm not sure it's as possible as we like to believe. If it's a nature vs. nurture debate, I'm picking nature about 95% of the time. I'm not arguing guys can't improve - obviously they can. But I think the ability to improve dramatically is much more limited than we want to believe.

Click to expand...

Well when we've lived in an era for 30 years of mediocre talent evaluation, paired with mediocre talent development, that we don't see what other teams do.

I don't think it's an accident that certain teams tend to evaluate, and develop players better than others. It pains me to say it, but Philly....

Zack Baun was a no named special teams player in New Orleans, who barely got on the field. His first year in Philly and he's an All-Pro.




Now of course I'm not suggesting that EVERY player that is a Special Teams contributor is an All-Pro in hiding, because Boone, to your point, the guys that are generally the best at ST also aren't premium contributors elsewhere. It's the best way to help prevent injury issues for contributors in the two more impactful parts of the game. It's part of why we were questioning McCaffrey returning kicks after so many other WRs had gone down.

I hope the expectation changes around here, and that we start to get a flow of talent that starts at the bottom, instead of being exclusive to the top 10% of the roster... and that we actually start having guys who are NFL talent make the roster by way of ST, and get developed up. Boone, I'm not totally disputing your 95% number, but i think other teams have much more stark difference where less talented players are developed into contributors. Not game changers necessarily, but at least get the most out of what they can do, instead of depending solely on their Nature to dictate their influence on the the outcome of the game.

I think what Boone is saying is it absolutely possible guys will improve, but it probably happens less often than we might think. I honestly don't know if I agree or disagree with that because I'd want to actually look at some statistical data to either support or contradict it. However, to me, it feels somewhat right.

I think what you can say is most players will improve year over year as they get more experience. That's just life, you get better at things the more you do them, until you lose the physical/mental ability to do them as well as you could.

The question really is how often a player take a huge leap forward. So, they go from somebody who you would expect just moderate success from based on their initial production to being a pro-bowl or all-pro level. Or, in the case of Reeves, he couldn't even make the 53 on ST, and then he was selected to the pro-bowl as a STer. I think those are big leaps.

The question is, how often do they happen? I think we can all agree they do happen. But I think what Boone is suggesting is they don't happen very often. And absent a detailed data study, I'd tend to agree if for no other reason Reeves is the only obvious player I can think of that improved that dramatically.

Another way of saying it might be bad could get to ok, ok can get to good, good can get to great, but going from bad to great doesn't happen as often.

As it relates to Lane, I think he's great at Punt Returns. He's probably bad at WR. Could he go from Bad to Ok? I'd say probably. Would an OK receiver make an NFL roster? Probably not, unless they were great at something else. ** If somebody were to argue Lane is already "ok" at WR, I don't know that I would argue. But he's not going to get on the field much this year. If they keep 7, he's probably #7 as WR, but #1 at PR, therefore he earns a jersey and will be active on gamedays.

I just would like to see him get some opportunities to prove himself during games I know what we are getting as a special teams punt returner
Just would like to see him add something to his game and yes as I read he has the drops
Maybe that gets fixed

But I guess a couple of punt returns for TDs will be great