Tyson is the guy at Arizona St. while Tate gets the advantage of having the best player in college football drawing attention away from him. They’re also nothing alike as players and I think it’s easier to find a Tate than a Tyson. Both would thrive here in the short term though. No question in that.
Am still digesting both players. I think the combine is important for both of them.
I don't worry about their teams having other good WRs as to the evaluatiion. I recall back in the day some would say the same to knock Devonte Smith -- hey he's got Ruggs, Waddle, Jeudy, etc. Tate gets plenty of attention from the defense to showcase what he can do. Also, the big ten has typically stiffer competition.
I like Tyson from the context of you see him running around the field, all over it, first level, 2nd level, 3rd -- a lot of first level. Reminds me some of Nabers but without Nabers YAC ability. Really good run blocker and he gets downfield to make some blocks way down the field. Really good hands.
I like Tate from the context of he makes big plays down the field, a skill which this team could use. We don't want another season of teams crowding the line of scrimmage or betting on blitzes working without repercussions. Tate makes so many big plays down field. And his catch radius is sick. According to PFF he has zero drops this season. He's at least by PFF metrics and even better blocker than Tyson.
Tate on 20 plus yard throws is 9 for 10. On 10 plus he's 10 for 14. Tyson on 20 plus is 4 for 15. on 10 plus he's 14 for 29. Tyson is at his best catching the ball on short passes -- 25 for 31 at 0-9 yards and 15 for 15 behind the line of scrimmage.
Tate at least the college version is a home run-doubles hitter. Tyson has some of that in him, but not as prolific as Tate, he's more of a singles hitter.
Tate's more of a move the chain type of WR with some big play in him -- that's why he reminds me in that regards to Nabers or Diggs. But IMO he's no Nabers because Nabers is so dangerous with YAC while Tyson is meh as far as YAC. I notice some draftniks praise him for YAC but I didn't see it much in the games I watched and I looked up his YAC numbers with PFF and they are pedestrian.
Tate reminds me more of a Higgins-Devante Adams type. He's also a better contested catcher IMO than Tyson.
I can see either one being better than the other in the pros on first glance. In other words, there are two different style WRs. I don't know if one type is harder to find than another. If I had to stick to that point, I'd go with Tate because I don't think its easier to find tall dudes who don't drop any balls, make contested catches routinely (almost 100% contested catch rating from PFF), have sick catch radius and seems to be a magnet for making big plays. Both players are currently banged up, missing time. Tyson is the one who had the big injury in colllege, tearing his ACL if I recall when he was a freshman.
Tyson, strikes me a little more boom-bust. From a bust standpoint, I don't think he has a low floor, but i think its possible he ends up just OK. But yeah if he ends up Stephan Diggs, Smith-Njigba round 2, then you found one heck of a gem.
I think their 40 time is going to be big. With the way Tyson plays who catches a lot underneath, you are going to want ideally good speed -- especially considering you wonder why he's just OK at YAC. As for Tate, you want him to have Davante Smith type speed, be somewhere in the 4'5's. If its in the high 4'6s am not intigued
 }})
. 
