User Pass
Home Sign Up Contact Log In
Forum > Position Talk > WR Club > Ball Hawk... what to believe?
norse79
offline
Link
 
I've heard 2 different opinions about Ball Hawk for WRs.

One, that +15 in Ball Hawk is overkill because when the QB is throwing to you and he has a good throw there isn't that much of a needed burst for you to get there. It only helps with bad throws.

2nd is Ball Hawk is a must have and if a CB has it (which most do) and you don't, your outmatched.

What do you all think?
 
tyrell2110
offline
Link
 
Originally posted by norse79
I've heard 2 different opinions about Ball Hawk for WRs.

One, that +15 in Ball Hawk is overkill because when the QB is throwing to you and he has a good throw there isn't that much of a needed burst for you to get there. It only helps with bad throws.

2nd is Ball Hawk is a must have and if a CB has it (which most do) and you don't, your outmatched.

What do you all think?


Ball Hawk is far more useful for CBs than WRs, because CBs usually need the jump to make play on the ball
 
Link
 
^ Agreed. The boost towards WRs is much more minimal.
 
Mob-6
offline
Link
 
The simple question is, "does it help you catch?" If vision and agility play a role in the catch roll than I think this is a fantastic VA. A 30% bonus to agility and vision should be pretty good. If vision and agility play no role or a very small percentage of the catching roll, than it is worthless. That being said, I notice my WRs with more vision actually adjust to the ball, giving them more time to do that is huge.
 
Djinnt
offline
Link
 
The only viable time to take ball hawk is if your speed, agility AND vision are all relatively high, otherwise you don't take full benefit of the VA.

I have such a WR, and I've tested Ball Hawk, and I can tell you now that there are more useful VAs to take. The bonus to catching is negligible, and the bonus to movement speed in my experience is completely lacking. It's unfortunate because I idealized it working as a key piece in my build (this was before Slot Machine VA) but at least now I know what's replacing it.
 


You are not logged in. Please log in if you want to post a reply.