WR ODELL BECKHAM JR., LOUISIANA ST.*

Image

6’0” – 193 lbs. – 4.45e

STATISTICAL PROFILE:

2011: 41 – 475 – 2 (11.6)
2012: 43 – 713 – 2 (16.6)
2013: 59 – 1,152 – 8 (19.5)

OVERVIEW:

Started nine of fourteen games as a true freshman, finishing second on the team in receptions and receiving yards. Started twelve of thirteen games played in 2012, leading the team in receiving yards and finishing second in catches. Also contributes as a punt returner.

POSITIVES:

• Possesses adequate height, weight, and speed for a pro wide receiver prospect.
• Would be leaving school with three years of starting experience in a major conference.
• Yards-per-catch have increased each year in college, up to nearly twenty in 2013.
• Fast enough to avoid being chased down from behind once he’s in the open field.
• Experienced return specialist who offers more than just offensive value (two PR TDs.)
• Effective with the ball in his hands, whether on punts, after the catch, or on reverses.
• Settles into soft spots in zone coverage rather than running himself out of position.
• Has had a lot of success running comebacks on the boundaries for the Tigers.
• Is a legitimate option on back-shoulder throws, can adjust to balls thrown behind him.

NEGATIVES:

• Probably lacks the physical tools to become a team’s number one receiving option.
• Inconsistent hands, has dropped his fair share of targets, including some easy ones.
• Arms look a little bit shorter than average, leading to a somewhat limited catch radius.
• Doesn’t seem to track the ball very well downfield, has some trouble with positioning.
• Hasn’t done too much work as a short-yardage receiver, generally intermediate/deep.
• Operates almost exclusively outside the hashes, not asked to go over the middle much.
• High-effort blocker, but overall effectiveness is limited by poor angles/technique.

SUMMARY:

Beckham’s overall movement skills help him overcome his lack of ideal size for a boundary receiver; he is fast enough to gain separation in the open field, generally runs good routes, and doubles as a solid return specialist, whether on punts or kicks. His hands and catch radius leave something to be desired, but the different ways in which he can threaten an opponent should help him earn some consideration in the draft’s second day. Certainly not as physical or effective on shorter routes as his teammate Jarvis Landry, but is the more dynamic of the two options overall. His escalating production over each of the three seasons he’s been at LSU are also a positive.

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s