Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.
[Dynasty] 2014 Draft Prospects (2 Viewers)
- Thread starter Xue
- Start date
werdnoynek
Footballguy
Exactly, all Sankey showed was that he hits the gym. I don't look at bench numbers as any sort of indicator of a prospect's running game/ability.
Below are a listing of the RBs (since 2007) who have benched 225 lbs 20 or more times, and ran a 40 in the 4.4s (kind of a select group):
Knile Davis
Jordan Todman
Ben Tate
Rashard Mendenhall
Marshawn Lynch
werdnoynek
Footballguy
cloppbeast
Footballguy
Lots of people have said Carey fell because of his 40 time. I don't understand this. Did anybody expect him to run fast? Same goes for other running backs like Carlos Hyde, and Jeremy Hill.
Carey - I thought he would run better than 4.7 - I also thought that he wouldn't perform and look like he was out until 2am drinking Captain and Cokes the night before. He really looked out of sorts.I somewhat agree with you on Hill and Hyde, but I did expect them to run a little faster and test out a little better....
Valid reasons to tweak you rankings if you ask me.... I did say tweak.
Last edited by a moderator:
Time Kibitzer
Footballguy
Not sure where you got that list from but according to nfl.com you're missing a bunch of players who fit that criteria, such as:
Jonathan Stewart
Montario Hardesty
Cedric Peerman
Cyrus Gray
Andre Brown
Ian Johnson
Alonzo Coleman
Chris Henry
Lorenzo Booker
There may be more but I stopped looking. It's not exactly a list of who's who; certainly not that select of a group anyway.
Last edited by a moderator:
werdnoynek
Footballguy
Right. What does the bench press show us about them as running backs? Absolutely nothing.
Xue
Footballguy
Was not high on Carey at all before the Combine. I saw an ordinary RB. His Combine performance reminds me of Jawan Jamison.
werdnoynek
Footballguy
cloppbeast
Footballguy
Time Kibitzer
Footballguy
That would be my conclusion as well. Though personally I'd take it even further and say the same for basically every single drill at the combine. If you go through the combine's top RB performers over the last several odd years here: nfl.com, the top performer lists for every single drill is littered with nobodies. I certainly wouldn't guess the correlation between being a top performer and having NFL success is near significant enough to justify the uproar and upheaval of draft rankings that the combine causes year in and year out. As far as I'm concerned, all a RB needs to do to show he has the potential to be a successful back is meet a reasonable baseline for most drills, but even then I'm willing to make exceptions.
Such as for Jeremy Hill this year. I'm guessing his 4.66 40 time will scare off lots of people, but if you watch his highlights he wins pretty well every foot race he has in the open field, and he had quite a lot of them this past season. He's a classic example of someone who plays way faster than his timed speed, just as Andre Ellington was last year. Personally Hill's 4.66 40 doesn't scare me in the slightest.
Last edited by a moderator:
werdnoynek
Footballguy
How about Logan Thomas... the guy pretty much lit up the combine. I think with a couple of years in a good system behind an established vet, he could work out the kinks. He was so inconsistent at VT but showed flashes. I think he'll be a good late round pick and could pay off.
werdnoynek
Footballguy
Agreed. Same with Seastrunk, the guy flies in game. Not concerned at all with the slow 40.
EBF
Footballguy
He didn't look too bad on his run considering how slow the time was. He's not carrying around a spare tire like Jon Dwyer:
http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-videos/0ap2000000328419/Hill-s-40-yard-dash
I think he "plays" to a ~4.55. Fine for someone that size. Would've been more reassuring to see that on the stopwatch though.
It bears pointing out that Eddie Lacy and Keenan Allen (arguably the top two instant impact rookies last season) both bombed their workouts pretty hard. The combine clearly means something. It doesn't mean everything though. Not every measurable is an accurate reflection of how the players function and not every essential football skill for all of the various positions is easily quantifiable. I'd say there's a clear relationship between workout numbers and elite NFL success, but it's not totally predictive. There are always going to be guys like Chad Johnson who crap the bed in their workouts and then light up the league. Likewise, there are always going to be some paper gods like Donald Brown who flat out aren't that good when the games start. It's an inexact science.
My Pre-Combine RB top 10
1- Jeremy Hill
2- Bishop Sankey
3- Ka'Deem Carey
4- Tre Mason
5- Carlos Hyde
6- Lache Seatrunk
7- Devonta Freeman
8- Isaiah Crowell
9- Charles Sims
10- Andre Williams
Post-Combine
1- Bishop Sankey
2- Tre Mason
3- Jeremy Hill
4- Lache Seastrunk
5- Carlos Hyde
6- Charles Simms
7- Andre Williams
8- Devonta Freeman
9- Isaiah Crowell
10- Storm Johnson
I have a hard time fitting Carey in my top 10. I just couldn't do it after this horrendous performance...
1- Jeremy Hill
2- Bishop Sankey
3- Ka'Deem Carey
4- Tre Mason
5- Carlos Hyde
6- Lache Seatrunk
7- Devonta Freeman
8- Isaiah Crowell
9- Charles Sims
10- Andre Williams
Post-Combine
1- Bishop Sankey
2- Tre Mason
3- Jeremy Hill
4- Lache Seastrunk
5- Carlos Hyde
6- Charles Simms
7- Andre Williams
8- Devonta Freeman
9- Isaiah Crowell
10- Storm Johnson
I have a hard time fitting Carey in my top 10. I just couldn't do it after this horrendous performance...
Time Kibitzer
Footballguy
I can't stress that enough.Just because a drill attempts to reflect a player's level of skill/talent for a particular football skill doesn't imply that it actually accomplishes doing so. Same exact thing for PFF's ratings for players; you see people here mention those ratings all the time as if they're bible, but really they're just an attempt to measure something that's inherently unquantifiable, and there's really little to no reason to believe their ratings accomplish what they're trying to accomplish whatsoever, but that's neither here nor there.
I agree with you both. Drills at the combine performed on a certain day at a certain point in time cannot be all that you rely on. A player could have a bad day.... Not get a good start off the line in their two forty runs...etc...
Just because a drill attempts to reflect a player's level of skill/talent for a particular football skill doesn't imply that it actually accomplishes doing so. Same exact thing for PFF's ratings for players; you see people here mention those ratings all the time as if they're bible, but really they're just an attempt to measure something that's inherently unquantifiable, and there's really little to no reason to believe their ratings accomplish what they're trying to accomplish whatsoever, but that's neither here nor there.
But - someone could say that if you can't get up for the combine it may be an indicator that a person is not clutch... Not prepared for the biggest day of their career, and therefore may not show up on Sundays....???
Time Kibitzer
Footballguy
What I'm saying is the drills may not actually measure what they're trying to. Like 40 times may not be a very good measure of functional football speed, bench press may not be a very good measure of functional football strength, 3 cone drill may not be a very good measure of functional football agility, etc. It could be aaid that these drills do a piss poor job of replicating football movements that these players actually use in the game, and therefore aren't nearly as valuable or relevant as people make them out to be.I agree with you both. Drills at the combine performed on a certain day at a certain point in time cannot be all that you rely on. A player could have a bad day.... Not get a good start off the line in their two forty runs...etc...
Just because a drill attempts to reflect a player's level of skill/talent for a particular football skill doesn't imply that it actually accomplishes doing so. Same exact thing for PFF's ratings for players; you see people here mention those ratings all the time as if they're bible, but really they're just an attempt to measure something that's inherently unquantifiable, and there's really little to no reason to believe their ratings accomplish what they're trying to accomplish whatsoever, but that's neither here nor there.
But - someone could say that if you can't get up for the combine it may be an indicator that a person is not clutch... Not prepared for the biggest day of their career, and therefore may not show up on Sundays....???
So maybe the players just had a bad day, but maybe it's the drills fault and not the players fault. Maybe the drills just suck at telling us anything about how good a football player is.
Last edited by a moderator:
Donnybrook
Footballguy
I have my doubts that this will work. Do teams really have the patience to do this when roster spots are at a premium? It would be the equivalent of a Joe Webb type experiment.
Last edited by a moderator:
msudaisy26
Footballguy
Donnybrook
Footballguy
You, of course, know that the team has to cut him to get onto the practice squad. It kinda defeats the purpose of drafting him.
Sankey's legs are shorter than the vast majority of prospects at the combine running the 40. Should he then get "extra credit" for running a time in the 4.4s with his short widdow wegs?Strength is strength - speed is speed.
As far as strength is concerned it is a measurable that the NFL wants to see. Why? Because it is important. Would you rather have a running back who is strong or one that is not as strong? I'll take the super strong, fast guy with a great history of success in a top conference.
Sankey proved a lot over this past weekend. I think Seastrunk showed ok as well, but give me a Sankey-type over a Seastrunk-type any day!
Let me define it for you:
Sankey-type
North-south runner
Goaline ball carrier
Tough inside the tackles runner
Built like a mighty-mite brick ****house
Makes great cuts and makes people miss
Smooth Catcher of the football
Speed in the 4.4s- CHECK!
A history of success in high school and in a top college conference
Seastrunk-type
Not as good as a north south runner as Sankey
Not as good of goaline back
Not as tough and strong of runner between the tackles
Has great agility, makes great cuts, and has ability to make people miss
Seems to be able to catch the football
Comparable speed - but apparently not as fast
Also a history of success in high school and in a top conference
All thing being equal - give me the tougher/faster guy...
Last edited by a moderator:
cloppbeast
Footballguy
Last edited by a moderator:
Dinsy Ejotuz
Footballguy
Worth mentioning that NFL players have said PFF's grades are pretty close to those their NFL teams gave them, and that PFF has actual NFL teams paying for their data as well. So... they're pretty good IMO.
Just because a drill attempts to reflect a player's level of skill/talent for a particular football skill doesn't imply that it actually accomplishes doing so. Same exact thing for PFF's ratings for players; you see people here mention those ratings all the time as if they're bible, but really they're just an attempt to measure something that's inherently unquantifiable, and there's really little to no reason to believe their ratings accomplish what they're trying to accomplish whatsoever, but that's neither here nor there.
That doesn't get around the problem that two players at the same position of equal talent will end up with different grades based on the scheme and talent around them (a rising Manning lifts all boats -- or something), but the scores are a good reflection of whether or not that player consistently did what they were supposed to do.
I thought in looking at his film he had some great moves with the ball in his hand, had a nose for the end zone, big conference production, and he looked pretty quick and reasonably fast with the ball in his hands.
I guess those things are still true - you can't take that away and can't forget it....
However, in watching that combine yesterday he looked so out of sorts and a little out of shape.... It just made it very hard for me to put him in my top 10... That could change, but 24 hours after the combine I just could not stomach putting him in the top 10.
BOTTOMLINE - I thought for sure he would run in the 4.5-4.6 range. A guy his size needs some element of speed to his game IMO. A 4.7 just ain't gonna didn't cut it...
Catbird
Footballguy
Maybe that's why you look back to see if he showed up on Saturdays?I agree with you both. Drills at the combine performed on a certain day at a certain point in time cannot be all that you rely on. A player could have a bad day.... Not get a good start off the line in their two forty runs...etc...
Just because a drill attempts to reflect a player's level of skill/talent for a particular football skill doesn't imply that it actually accomplishes doing so. Same exact thing for PFF's ratings for players; you see people here mention those ratings all the time as if they're bible, but really they're just an attempt to measure something that's inherently unquantifiable, and there's really little to no reason to believe their ratings accomplish what they're trying to accomplish whatsoever, but that's neither here nor there.
But - someone could say that if you can't get up for the combine it may be an indicator that a person is not clutch... Not prepared for the biggest day of their career, and therefore may not show up on Sundays....???
Orlando RMF
Footballguy
I know there is not a lot of Dri Archer hype and he will probably provide modest if any Fantasy Football value except for kick return leagues where he may be huge. I could see him used on a limited bases like Dexter McCluster or solely as a kick returner like Josh Cribbs.
His measurables other than height or weight were very good. Add 15 pounds for durability and he may be worth a late round fantasy flier. Regardless he should be fun to watch on Sundays. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e-3JgIG9hhM
His measurables other than height or weight were very good. Add 15 pounds for durability and he may be worth a late round fantasy flier. Regardless he should be fun to watch on Sundays. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e-3JgIG9hhM
lyon812
Footballguy
Sankey's done great. Still, I'm a little disappointed to see that Crowell, Hill, West, and Seastrunk all skipped the 3-cone, and Mason only ran the short shuttle. Hard to make comparisons.
jurb26
Footballguy
Archer could have a role in today's NFL. 10 years ago, not a chance. I like the thought of using him like Sproles or McCluster. His time on the field would be very limited though. He's just not big enough. Adding 15 pounds is probably not going to happen. It's certainly not going to happen with him keeping his functional speed and athleticism. I'd say he should look to add 5 - 8 pounds as it would allow him to keep his speed and movement skills.
bicycle_seat_sniffer
Smells like chicken
Time Kibitzer
Footballguy
Lots of hearsay there. We have no way of substantiating either of those claims, such as which teams, how many teams, or if they're even telling the truth at all.Worth mentioning that NFL players have said PFF's grades are pretty close to those their NFL teams gave them, and that PFF has actual NFL teams paying for their data as well. So... they're pretty good IMO.
Just because a drill attempts to reflect a player's level of skill/talent for a particular football skill doesn't imply that it actually accomplishes doing so. Same exact thing for PFF's ratings for players; you see people here mention those ratings all the time as if they're bible, but really they're just an attempt to measure something that's inherently unquantifiable, and there's really little to no reason to believe their ratings accomplish what they're trying to accomplish whatsoever, but that's neither here nor there.
That doesn't get around the problem that two players at the same position of equal talent will end up with different grades based on the scheme and talent around them (a rising Manning lifts all boats -- or something), but the scores are a good reflection of whether or not that player consistently did what they were supposed to do.
One thing is for sure, NFL teams don't make personnel decisions based on PFF grades. Teams start numerous players with poorer PFF grades over players with higher PFF grades every single week.
Dinsy Ejotuz
Footballguy
Faust
MVP
Brandin Cooks, Mike Evans seem to be likely first-rounders
By Mike Huguenin
College Football 24/7 writer
By Mike Huguenin
College Football 24/7 writer
Last edited by a moderator:
lod01
Footballguy
I liked Giovani Bernard last year. This guy beat all of Bernard's numbers yesterday. Definitely would want him to go somewhere where he can catch out of the backfield.
Faust
MVP
EBF
Footballguy
Pauline usually knows what he's talking about, but he's way off the mark with that one.
Mason had an excellent combine. He came in at a solid height/weight. 207 pounds isn't a huge back, but on a 5'8.125" frame, it's above average bulk. 4.50 is a perfectly fine time for a stocky RB. It's not elite speed, but it's not slow at all. Mason was very good in the jumps. 38.5" is an excellent vertical for anyone and 10'5" in the broad jump is a rare mark for someone who's only 5'8".
He really solidified his draft stock and seems like a good bet to be a top 45-50 overall pick.
JFS171
Footballguy
I can understand why Robinson is "sliding" after the slower than expected 40-time, but quite honestly he looks like a player to me. Someone's going to get a pretty damn good receiver in the 2nd or 3rd round. It's easy to say it's Keenan Allen all over again, even though that doesn't happen very frequently… but Robinson seems like a guy that's going to be a very nice bargain for his eventual team.
Bob Magaw
Footballguy
I wrote for PFF back a few years ago (no longer do) and interviewed a number of players during that time and wrote about it. Part of each interview was to get some feedback directly from the players on what they felt about specific PFF's grades. The questions centered around specific games only. In particular, Josh Sitton was very vocal about a disagreement he had on a particular game grade when I spoke to him and Neil (the owner) ended up going back, reviewing the tape, and changing a sack allowed to someone else's responsibility other than Sitton. So, I can say based on those discussions directly with certain players (and you can go on site and read yourself) that a number of players agree with certain games being their best/worst, but my work on that front was relateively general. So, in short, there is some substance behind it that I can corroborate.
I would imagine they've done some additional work to get feedback, but I can't personally comment on what the feedback was/is.
ShaHBucks
Footballguy
No exclamation points?
ConnSKINS26
Footballguy
That key was confiscated.
Last edited by a moderator:
