X vs. Y vs. Z receivers

[Direckshun]

If you need a primer of what these players are, click here.

The Chiefs' current depth chart at WR (along with the X/Y/Z they play):

Kadarious Toney (Y/Z)
Marquez Valdez-Scantling (X, deep threat)
Skyy Moore (Y)
Justin Watson (probably) (Y)
John Ross (Z)
Justyn Ross (X, possession)

Thoughts about this depth chart:

• Assuming, as we all do, that the Chiefs bring back Watson, the Chiefs have a good slate of Y talent. Not a big need.
• MVS is not a true possession receiver X, but his single-dimensional deep threat tree is always lined out wide, and he only played Y and Z in the AFCCG. X is a real need.
• Toney is not really a full time Z given how talented he is in an actual route tree. Z is a real need.
• Nobody cares about Ross & Ross.

So with that in mind, here's a far-too-clean division of the receivers in this draft who best align as Xs, Ys, and Zs.

(Two disclaimers: in the Andy Reid offense, these three letters do change it up more than most, and while many of the players listed here can do more than one letter, I am just identifying them by their predominant one.)

X receivers (possession):

Quentin Johnson, TCU
Xavier Hutchinson, Iowa State
Rashee Rice, SMU
Ronnie Bell, Michigan
Puka Nacua, BYU
Grant DuBose, Charlotte
Elijah Higgins, Stanford
Michael Wilson, Stanford
Bryce Ford-Wheaton, West Virginia
Jake Bobo, UCLA
Jaray Jenkins, LSU
A.T. Perry, Wake Forest
Jalen Wayne, South Alabama
Justin Shorter, Florida

X receivers (deep threat):

Jalin Hyatt, Tennessee
Marvin Mims, Oklahoma
Cedric Tillman, Tennessee
Dontayvion Wicks, Virginia
Antoine Green, North Carolina

Y receivers:

Jaxon Smith-Njigba, Ohio State
Jordan Addison, USC
Josh Downs, North Carolina
Jayden Reed, Michigan State
Rakim Jarrett, Maryland
Trey Palmer, Nebraska
Parker Washington, Penn State
Jalen Cropper, Fresno State
Charlie Jones, Purdue
Kearis Jackson, Georgia

Z receivers:

Zay Flowers, Boston College
Kayshon Boutte, LSU
Tyler Scott, Cincinnati
Tank Dell, Houston
Tre Tucker, Cincinnati
Derius Davis, TCU
Nikko Remigio, Fresno State

Unicorns (truly couldn't figure out where to put them, they don't even have a tendency towards one of the letters above):

Andrei Iosivas, Princeton
Jonathan Mingo, Ole Miss
Joseph Ngata, Clemson

[The Franchise]

I know DJ has said it multiple times but Kelce is pretty much our X receiver at this point.

[Direckshun]

Originally Posted by The Franchise

I know DJ has said it multiple times but Kelce is pretty much our X receiver at this point.

X/Y hybrid but I agree.

[Couch-Potato]

I'd prob swap Tillman and Perry on your list

[ToxSocks]

How do you not have Mingo as an X receiver? Dude is probably one of the most plug n play X receivers in the draft.

He's basically a bigger, stronger, faster Smith-Schuster.

[Chris Meck]

Originally Posted by Detoxing

How do you not have Mingo as an X receiver? Dude is probably one of the most plug n play X receivers in the draft.

He's basically a bigger, stronger, faster Smith-Schuster.

Because I don't think he knows what he's talking about.

[DJ's left nut]

Originally Posted by The Franchise

I know DJ has said it multiple times but Kelce is pretty much our X receiver at this point.

If I said X, I meant Z.

At least via 'conventional' labeling schemes. And yeah, we sometimes use him in a Y role as well.

[O.city]

JJSS was the Z here right? Am I confused again? I've been huffing nitrous allmorning.

[DJ's left nut]

Originally Posted by O.city

JJSS was the Z here right? Am I confused again? I've been huffing nitrous allmorning.

He was called the Z but in practice he was used almost like a TE w/ Kelce assuming a lot of those Z routes when he was moved off the line.

[ToxSocks]

X Y Z...whatever the ****. The big guys.

[kccrow]

Too much attention to an antiquated approach to it all. What about your slot? A slot and a z are technically two different placements. What if you treat your te as a Flex like KC rather than a trading Y? You're ****ing your algorithm. Reid looks for guys that can be multiple as much as possible so that he can align them anywhere. If he drops kelce from y to z then he needs a guy that can step up to y to win against press man. He moves his alignment of the split ends inside and outside of his slot and z. It's all relative. If you want to identify a Reid receiver, look for the ones that can do the most things. If they can win split and on the line, they can win off the line. Can they run a lot of motion? Can they execute the sweeps? Are they yac guys?

[DJ's left nut]

Originally Posted by kccrow

Too much attention to an antiquated approach to it all. What about your slot? A slot and a z are technically two different placements. What if you treat your te as a Flex like KC rather than a trading Y? You're ****ing your algorithm. Reid looks for guys that can be multiple as much as possible so that he can align them anywhere. If he drops kelce from y to z then he needs a guy that can step up to y to win against press man. He moves his alignment of the split ends inside and outside of his slot and z. It's all relative. If you want to identify a Reid receiver, look for the ones that can do the most things. If they can win split and on the line, they can win off the line. Can they run a lot of motion? Can they execute the sweeps? Are they yac guys?

It's not an 'algorithm' - it's just a shorthand. And yes, shorthands are going to have significant limitations. Nobody's saying it's a rubric that must be adhered to - it's largely just a shorthand for the skills you typically find in those players and how they would normally complement each other.

I've just decided that there's no such thing as a 'Reid Receiver' - guy wants good players and sometimes that means working around guys flaws while accentuating strengths, other times it means just having rounded guys everywhere.

He's done this for so long that you can point to teams where he's had 3-4 guys who filled different and specific roles. He pretty much did that this year. Then he's also had teams where he has 3-4 guys who are pretty similar that he uses largely interchangeably.

In the meantime he's gotten massive production out of TO, DeSean Jackson and all points in between.

I think the Chiefs WR room is presently a blank enough slate that he can really take it whatever direction fits the available talent best. If that means taking Hyatt because they believe he's the best deep threat and Kelce/Moore provide complementary possession weapons, maybe they go that route. Or if they think Flowers or even Downs are better overall weapons that can be more multiple in their use and he wants to pursue THAT path going forward, they could easily go that route.

I just think Andy has will make talent play so trying to identify a 'Reid Receiver' is something of a fool's errand.

[Shoes]

I don't get bogged down much in the X vs Y vs Z receivers- I think we saw with all the injuries this postseason that there is an expectation that the receivers know exactly what every position is doing on the field. When rostering the best possible team though, I think right now the Chiefs have enough talent on the inside or "Y" receiver that they'll be more likely to add a receiver whose skillset is best utilized on the outside. If MVS were to go down, things are starting to look pretty grim. Toney and Moore have experience on the outside but I think their skillset is more effective in the slot where they have two way goes the majority of the time.

Tough part about this draft in my opinion is the guys who I think would be a real good fit to the receiving room style wise, I don't feel are necessarily great picks at #31, but I don't know if they'll be there at the end of round 2 (Rice, Hyatt).

The back end of our receiving room I have no idea what to expect out of either. Justyn Ross and John Ross are total enigmas to me and it's hard to project what they are going to add to your football team in case of injury.

[kccrow]

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

It's not an 'algorithm' - it's just a shorthand. And yes, shorthands are going to have significant limitations. Nobody's saying it's a rubric that must be adhered to - it's largely just a shorthand for the skills you typically find in those players and how they would normally complement each other.

I've just decided that there's no such thing as a 'Reid Receiver' - guy wants good players and sometimes that means working around guys flaws while accentuating strengths, other times it means just having rounded guys everywhere.

He's done this for so long that you can point to teams where he's had 3-4 guys who filled different and specific roles. He pretty much did that this year. Then he's also had teams where he has 3-4 guys who are pretty similar that he uses largely interchangeably.

In the meantime he's gotten massive production out of TO, DeSean Jackson and all points in between.

I think the Chiefs WR room is presently a blank enough slate that he can really take it whatever direction fits the available talent best. If that means taking Hyatt because they believe he's the best deep threat and Kelce/Moore provide complementary possession weapons, maybe they go that route. Or if they think Flowers or even Downs are better overall weapons that can be more multiple in their use and he wants to pursue THAT path going forward, they could easily go that route.

I just think Andy has will make talent play so trying to identify a 'Reid Receiver' is something of a fool's errand.

My argument is that using nomenclature for location on the field, based heavily on 21-personnel that dominated the 80s, is not necessarily indicative of skill set or relative to a particular matchup.

Most guys will talk about needing a couple of guys with good deep speed, a couple of guys with good short-area quickness, and a couple of guys that can do both. Where they align, though, isn't necessarily indicative of their abilities.

Sure, you might align your short-are guys more predominately as flankers or slots but they might be good at getting a clean release versus man and uncovering anyhow. Or, you can exploit a particular man matchup by putting one of those guys at split end because the corner to that side lacks the ability to get a jam against quick guys.

JuJu was a guy that you could line up anywhere and he could win. Tyreek could do the same. Maybe you "like" to give a guy like Tyreek more of a free release because of his acceleration so you align him as a flanker more often than not.

I think this is where we can't just put guys into specific roles and say "we have to get this guy that can play this spot."

We have a deep guy in MVS but he lacks in the short area. Toney and Moore can kind of do both. We probably need another deep guy, so bringing Watson back makes a lot of sense. We mostly need short-area guys right now. If you draft a guy like, say, Hyatt, then you're probably not bringing a guy like Watson back and you still need some short-area guys.

As for Reid, yeah he's had a "few" and that's a "few" outliers. Generally, he has guys that are 5'10" to 6'0" that are fast and agile. He likes multiple guys. He'll fill with what he can get, sure. He's always going to have those couple of guys in each realm whether he has his ideals or not.

I dunno, I guess I'm not really arguing need as much as I'm saying not to pigeonhole guys into X, Y, or Z.

[Chris Meck]

All I know is that if the actual draft plays out like any of these mocks (and of course, it probably won't) I'd prefer to trade down from 31 into the top third of the second, and then back up from the third into the second.

It just seems like that second to early third round is the money spot in this draft.

It's kind of that way every year, but especially so this year.